Karnataka High Court
Sri Lamen vs State Of Karnataka on 7 January, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G. UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9560/2021
BETWEEN:
SRI. LAMEN
S/O EXODUS
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/AT. NO. 41, B CROSS ROAD
OPP TO GANESH HALL
CMR COLONY HORAMAVU
BANGALORE - 560 043
PERMANENT ADDRESS:
R/O NO.1, B P 1355
ABIDIJAN 01, INVOIRIENNE
WEST AFRICA
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DEVARAJA P., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
SIDDAPURA POLICE REPRESENTED
BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SHANKAR H.S., HCGP)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.124/2021 REGISTERED BY SIDDAPURA POLICE
STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 489(A), 489(C), 489(E) OF IPC AND SECTION 14 OF
FOREIGNERS ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner-accused is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.124 of 2021 of Siddapura Police Station, Bengaluru, pending on the file of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 489C, 489E, 420 and 489A of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, on the basis of first information lodged by informant-Abraham.J.M.
2. Heard Sri.P Devaraja, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri.H S Shankar, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.
3
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the sole accused. He is innocent and has not committed any offences as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. He was apprehended on 04.08.2021 and since then he is in judicial custody. Initially, the petitioner had filed Criminal Petition No.6554 of 2021 seeking similar relief, but the same came to be rejected by this Court solely on the ground that the investigation was still in progress. Now the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet is filed for the offence punishable under Sections 489A, 489C and 489E of IPC along with Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. The petitioner is not required to be detained in custody for any other purposes. The trial in the case may take sufficiently long period of time and detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to infringement of his right, life and liberty. Even though, he is a foreign national, his passport is already seized by the police. Under such circumstances, abscondance of the accused would not arise. He is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be 4 imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioner for having committed the offences. Huge quantity of counterfeit notes were recovered from the possession of the petitioner, who is a foreign national. After completing investigation, the charge sheet is also filed. Since the petitioner is a foreign national, if he is enlarged on bail, there is every chance of he absconding. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
5. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
5
"Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following:
REASONS
6. The allegations made against the petitioner is of serious nature. The counterfeit notes worth Rs.1,50,00,000/- is said to have been recovered.
Admittedly, the petitioner is the foreign national. As per PF produced by the petitioner, passport of the petitioner is already seized. Under such circumstances, the contention of learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioner may fly out of India cannot be accepted. Admittedly, the petitioner is not required for further custody. The trial in the case may take sufficiently long period of time. Detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to pre-trial punishment. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the 6 apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioner may abscond or may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses.
7. 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.124/ of 2021 of Siddapura Police Station, Bengaluru, pending on the file of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, on obtaining 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.
7
d) The petitioner shall furnish necessary
documents in proof of his place of
residence and intimate the Investigating Officer/Trial Court in writing about any change in such place of residence, till conclusion of trial.
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 *bgn/-