Karnataka High Court
Nagaraja @ Akasha vs State Of Karnataka on 24 March, 2017
Author: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1056/2017
C/W.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.823/2017
IN CRL.P. NO.1056/2017
BETWEEN:
NAGARAJA @ AKASHA
S/O GUNDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/AT NO.61, ROOPACHANDRA BUILDING
NEAR KEMPAMMA TEMPLE
MARIYAPPANA PALYA
BENGALURU - 560 056.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI HARISH KUMAR H.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY JNANABHARATHI P.S.
BENGALURU
REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
BAIL IN CR.NO.337/2016 OF JNANABHARATHI P.S.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 489(B) AND 420
R/W 34 OF IPC.
2
IN CRL.P. NO.823/2017
BETWEEN:
KIRAN KUMAR
S/O MOHAN KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
R/AT NO.134, 1ST CROSS
BHUVANESHWARINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 056.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI BHARGAV N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
JNANABHARATHI POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
BAIL IN CR.NO.337/2016 OF JNANABHARATHI P.S.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 489A AND 420 R/W
34 OF IPC.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
These petitions are filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking enlargement of petitioners on regular bail in Crime No.337/2016 by Jnanabharathi Police Station, Kengeri Gate Sub-Division, Bengaluru 3 registered for commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 489B and r/w. 34 of IPC. Petitioner in Crl.P.No.1056/2017 is accused No.3 and petitioner in Crl.P.No.823/2017 is accused No.4.
2. Sri Harish Kumar H.C., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.1056/2017 and Sri Bhargav N., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.823/2017 arguing in support of their respective petitions contended that the complaint is against one Shashank, accused No.1, who was allegedly found using a counterfeit note to purchase liquour. Based on his statement, police have sought to implicate other accused. They argued that police could not have leveled the commission of offence under Section 489B of IPC, because they were not caught while using a counterfeit note as genuine. Even if the allegations against them are taken to be correct, at best, offences committed by them may fall under Section 489E of IPC, which is a bailable offence and punishable with fine of Rs.100/-. Section 420 of IPC attracts imprisonment for maximum of seven years. Learned counsel further submitted that accused No.4 - Kiran Kumar works in the service department of a reputed automobile company called Ravindu Toyota Motors Private Limited 4 and accused No.3 also works in a multi national company. Both are respectable citizens and undertake to abide any conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, they pray for allowing the petitions.
3. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the petitions. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of these petitions.
4. I have carefully considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader and perused the material papers.
5. The complaint shows that one Shashank was caught while he attempted to purchase liquour by tendering a counterfeit note having face value of Rs.2,000/-. Based on his statement, petitioners have been taken into custody. No material is brought before this Court by the prosecution to show that the petitioners have actually indulged themselves in using the counterfeit note. Therefore, there is sufficient force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners. Both the petitioners are aged 21 and 27 years 5 respectively. The punishment for the offences alleged is not death or life imprisonment. In the circumstance, in my view these petitions merit consideration. Accordingly, I pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) Petitioners shall be released on bail in Crime No.337/2016 registered in Jnanabharathi Police Station, Bengaluru upon their executing a self bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
(ii) Petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during the further course of investigation, if any, and appear before him as and when called upon;
(iii) Petitioners shall mark their attendance before the jurisdictional Police on every 1st and 3rd Sunday of each calendar month between 10 a.m. & 1 p.m till the charge sheet is filed;
(iv)Petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to prosecution witnesses or any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or investigating officer;6
(v) Petitioners shall not involve themselves in any criminal activities; and
(vi)If the petitioners violates any one of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.
Petitions allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE nvj