Karnataka High Court
N Veeraswamy S/O Mastanappa vs State Of Karnataka on 3 October, 2012
Author: Jawad Rahim
Bench: Jawad Rahim
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 03 R D DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11286/2012
BETWEEN:
N VEERASWAMY S/O MASTANAPPA
AGE ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/O.MASANANAIAH NILAYA
NEAR VALMIKI CIRCLE, GUNTATAKAL
KURNOOL DIST.A.P.
... PETITIONER
(By Sri. J BASAVARAJ ADV.)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
(BY GANDHI NAGAR P.S.BELLRAY)
REPRESENTED BY HIGH COURT PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH
DHARWAD
... RESPONDENT
(By Sri.V.M.BANAKAR, ASPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.439 OF
CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL
IN C.C.NO.171/2012 (CRIME NO.60/2006 REGISTERED IN
GANDHINAGAR POLICE STATION, BELLARY) NOW
PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
BELLARY FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 120-B,
307, 399, 150 R/W 149 IPC AND U/SEC. 25 OF ARMS ACT.
:2:
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
The petitioner is one of the accused in Crime No.60/2006 registered on the complaint of one Shaiksha @ Shaikshavali on 15.04.2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 307 and 399 of the IPC.
2. The case was registered in CC No.948/2007. The petitioner was not regular. Hence, the charge sheet was split against him and the other accused have been committed to trial before the Sessions Judge in S.C. No.49/2012. The charge-sheet against the petitioner was split and is re-registered in C.C. No.171/2012.
3. He was arrested and produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate who has rejected his bail plea. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner had not willfully absconded, because of :3: certain circumstances, he could not appear before the Court. Consequent to which, the charge sheet was split. He submits that he will comply with all the directions of this Court and will be regular.
4. The prosecution has opposed the bail on the ground that he has been absconding and will again indulge in same acts, causing impediment in trial. Hence, grant of bail is not justified.
5. From the contentions of both sides, it could be seen that the petitioner is one of the accused in Crime No.60/2006. He is facing charge along with others. After splitting of the charge- sheet against him was filed, the other accused have been committed to trial before the Court of Sessions in S.C. No.49/2012. The case is now posted for hearing regarding charge.
6. As far as the petitioner is concerned, he is still before the Magistrate Court and no committal :4: order is passed. I am satisfied that the petitioner shall be given one more opportunity. Hence, while allowing the bail petition, it is directed that the learned Magistrate shall commit the accused to the Court of Sessions and on such committal, the learned Sessions Judge shall try this accused along with other accused in S.C. No.49/2012 on the file of the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bellary.
7. The petition is allowed subject to the following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court or the Court of Sessions, as the case may be.
ii. The Petitioner is further directed to
report to the S.H.O or
Investigating Officer in-charge of
Crime No.60/2006 once in fifteen :5: days till the case is committed to the Court of Sessions.
iii. The petitioner shall not tamper
with the prosecution material or
prevail upon witnesses by any
means.
iv. The petitioner shall not leave the
Sessions jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
Sd/-
JUDGE Rkk/-