Karnataka High Court
Sri. Manoj Kumar vs State Of Karnataka on 9 June, 2023
-1-
CRL.P No. 3376 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3376/2023
BETWEEN:
SRI MANOJ KUMAR
S/O ELISHA,
AGED 32 YEARS, OCC: BANK ASSET,
RECONSTRUCTION AGENT, R/O: 12/2H, 114/C,
MOOSAPET KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD 500 072.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SANNA BALAPPA SHETTY K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KR PURAM POLICE STATION, K R PURAM,
BENGALURU - 560036, REPRESENTED BY HCGP/SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU - 560001.
Digitally signed
...RESPONDENT
by NANDINI B G (BY SRI K.S. ABHIJITH, ADVOCATE)
Location: High
Court Of
Karnataka THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C., PRAYING TO
GRANT BAIL TO THE PETITIONER-ACCUSED NO.2 IN CRIME
NO.529/2022, S.C. NO.479 OF 2023 OF THE K.R. PURAM
POLICE, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 307, 120B, 109
READ WITH 35 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE AND 3 AND 25 OF
ARMS ACT., PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE 5 CCH 21
IV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE MAYHALL
UNIT BENGALURU & ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS BEFORE THE
DHARWAD BENCH THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
CRL.P No. 3376 of 2023
ORDER
The petitioner-accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No. 529/2022 of K.R. Puram Police Station, pending on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and under Sections 3 and 35 of Arms Act, on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant R.Ashok Reddy.
2. Heard Sri K. Sanna Balappa Shetty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.S. Abhijith, learned HCGP for respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is arrayed as accused no.2. He is innocent and has not committed any offences as alleged. he has been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. Petitioner was apprehended on 10.12.2022 and since then he is in judicial custody. Initially, FIR came to be registered against four unknown persons. During investigation the petitioner and -3- CRL.P No. 3376 of 2023 other accused were apprehended. Now the investigation is already completed and charge sheet is filed. The petitioner had approached this Court by filing Crl. P. No. 1085/2023 along with the co-accused. The same was came to be dismissed vide order dated 23.02.2023. However, at that point of time, investigation was not yet completed. Now, since the investigation is completed, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned counsel further submitted that the accused nos. 3, 4, 6, 10 and 11 against whom similar allegations are made, are already enlarged on bail. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The petitioner is the permanent resident of the address shown in the cause title and is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for allowing the petition.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP opposing the bail petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioner for having committed the offences. Initially, similar petition filed by the petitioner was rejected on merits. There -4- CRL.P No. 3376 of 2023 are no changed circumstances. After completion of the investigation charge sheet is filed. There are two injured eyewitnesses to the incident. One of the injured has sustained as many as ten injuries, including bullet injuries. Considering the nature and seriousness of the case, the petitioner is not entitled for bail. Hence, he prays for rejecting the bail petition.
6. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?"
7. My answer to the above point is in the affirmative for the following:
REASONS
8. The allegations against all the accused are similar in nature. Injured eyewitness has filed complaint against unknown persons. During investigation the petitioner and other accused were apprehended. Admittedly, charge sheet is filed after investigation. It is not in dispute that there is no test identification parade held by the Investigating Officer for the reasons best known to him. The statement of the injured -5- CRL.P No. 3376 of 2023 discloses that he could identify only accused No.13 and no other accused. Inspite of that there is no test identification parade. Admittedly, the injured are already discharged from the hospital.
9. It is not the contention of the prosecution that the petitioner is required to be detained in custody. It is not in dispute that some of the co-accused are already enlarged on bail. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions.
10. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 529/2022 of K.R. Puram Police Station, pending on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 35 of Arms Act, on obtaining -6- CRL.P No. 3376 of 2023 the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:
a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.
b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.
If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.
On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE bvv List No.: 19 Sl No.: 7