Karnataka High Court
Smt G Lakshmi Ramesh vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 December, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 KAR 2223
Author: K.N.Phaneendra
Bench: K.N.Phaneendra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8045/2019
BETWEEN:
1. SMT G LAKSHMI RAMESH
W/O K R RAMESH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
ANCHEKERI, KENGERI,
BENGALURU-560060.
2. SMT. NAGARATHNA
W/O K.V.NAGARAJU
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
3. SRI. PRASHANTH K.N.
S/O K.V.NAGARAJU
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
PETITIONER NO. 2 AND 3
ARE RESIDING AT NO.101,
MYSORE ROAD, KENGERI,
BANGALORE-560060.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI: B N PUTTALINGAIAH, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KENGERI POLICE
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE-560009.
2. SRI B.N. SHIVALINGAMURTHY
2
S/O LATE B.V.NARAYAN
R/AT NO. 236, 6TH MAIN ROAD,
KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN
BENGALURU-60.
..RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI: HONNAPPA, HCGP FOR R1;
R2-SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.111/2017 OF KENGERI
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 427, 447, 34 OF IPC
AND SECTION 3(1) (f) (g) (r) (s) OF SC/ST (PA) ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Though Notice issued to respondent No.2 is said to have been served as per the submission made by learned HCGP, but the complainant has remained absent.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned HCGP for respondent No.1- State and perused the records.
3. The Petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.4, 5 and 6 in the additional charge sheet filed by the respondent police for the offences punishable under 3 sections 143, 147, 447, 427 r/w 149 of IPC and also under sections 3(1) (f), 3(1) (g) (r), (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
4. The brief facts of the case are that on 16.03.2017, the complainant by name Sri. B.N. Shivalingamurthy of Kengeri Upanagar, Bengaluru has lodged a complaint that on 22.12.2016, some people have stealthily entered into the land of the complainant and removed the zinc sheets and also the name board containing photographs of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. On 23.12.2016, in the morning, they came to the spot and he found that one K.R. Ramesh, K. V. Nagaraj and Chakravarthi- three accused persons brought a JCB and they removed the name plate containing photographs of Dr. B.R. Ambekar put in the said land. He lodged a complaint making said allegations that the police have not taken the complaint on the ground that no materials have been placed before the police and thereafter on 16.03.2017, he lodged the same complaint to the Commissioner of Police and police have registered 4 the case in Cr.No.111/2017 for the offence punishable under section 379 IPC. Subsequently, during the course of investigation, the police found that only two accused were involved in commission of such offences. Therefore, a charge sheet has been filed against two accused persons by name Sri. K.R. Ramesh and K.V. Nagaraj- accused Nos.1 and 2 for the above said offence. PW-1 was examined and at that time, the Court found that additional charge sheet has already been filed by the police incorporating the names of accused Nos.3 to 10 for the above said offences. It appears that police are making hectic attempts to arrest the petitioners and summons have been issued by the Court also. Therefore, they are reasonably apprehending arrest by the Court or by the police in this case.
5. Looking to the above said facts of the case, there are two charge sheets filed before the Court and at the initial stage, even in the complaint and FIR, no allegations have been made against these petitioners and 5 subsequently also, in the charge sheet filed, the only allegations are against accused Nos.1 and 2 even in the statement of the witnesses. But, subsequently, it appears that further investigation has been made inculcating the petitioners herein. Looking to the nature of the allegations, the facts of the case and the conduct of the complainant, in my opinion, petitioners have made ground for grant of anticipatory bail. Said allegations have to be established beyond reasonable doubt during the course of full dressed trial. Hence, the following:-
ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioners shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.111/2017 of Kengeri Police Station, for the alleged offences on the following conditions:-
i) The petitioners shall surrender themselves before the jurisdictional Court within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and each of them shall execute their respective 6 personal bonds for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety for the like-
sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in similar activities and they shall not hamper the investigation or tamper the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioners shall appear before the trial Court regularly till completion of the trial;
iv) The petitioners shall mark their attendance in the jurisdictional police on 1st of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till the trial is concluded.
Sd/-
JUDGE *mn/-