Karnataka High Court
Vasudeva Shetty @ Vasu, vs State Of Karnataka By Doddaballapur ... on 18 July, 2011
- 4° Ravikumar @ Ravi IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALCRE DATED THIS THE 187 DAY OF JULY 2011 BEFORE | _ , a THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K N KESHAVANARAYANA.. CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2831 CF 2011 -- BETWEEN: L. Vasudeva Shetty @ Vas. | 5/o. Subramanya Shetty, Aged 26 years, | cee R/at. No. 988/ 1 _ESt Mai in, Que ross). Near bombay: 'Dying, Mat hikere, - Yeshwanth pure a. : Bangalore. 2. Dhanashekaré > Shekar, - S/a. Parainesh, oO . Aged 26 -vears, 0 m R/at. 1% Cross. Triveni Road, Near Sharada Vidya Kendra, Yeshwar nth pu ra, Bangelore. "3. Srinivas @ Sée na, S/o. Kris shnappa. Aged: QA sre rs, yal. No.74, 4!) Cross. tran Dead Vaechuraeadhrie . 'Trivenivkoad, Yesnwanthpura. -. Bangatore. "S/o. Lakshmanappa. Aged 20 years. -Rfar4 Cross, 7) Main, Triveni Road. Near Papamina Choultry Yeshwanthpura Bangalore. Acco REC 5 ¥ f aA HESS 3. VY. Guruprasad @ Prasad, S/o. Late Veeranna, 26 years, Rfat. No.26, 2° Cross, Seenappa Building, on Doddabetiahalli, Vidyaranyapura Post, Bangalore. 6. Pramood, S/o. Anjenappa, Aged 26 years, *, Rfat No.26, 24 Cross; - Mohankurnar Nagar, : Bangalore. (Now all are, in al _ Centr ral - Prison, Sangalo. ---- a ar (By 'Sri. K S. Vis hw anatih, Adv ocate) AND: State of Karnataka, . . By Doddaballapur Town Police, " : (Represented | py State Public Prosecutor) . RESPOND EAET | 1B. 'Rajacubrimanys Bhat, CGP) | on 'Criminal Petition - is filed under Section 439(1i(b) _ - Sone PB. C. praying 'that: this: Hon ble: Court whay. be. pleased tore ce oe meaity/ /replace the | word 'learned: "IMFC/ Magistrate to = Sessions. Judge in' the Bail order and direct the Sessions a Court to. accept the sureties as per ihe bail order and io pass - oe the. release ¢ order in the ¢ ends | of Justice. This Criminal Petition coming. for orders this day, the Cot i made the following: o Sse! ORDER
Though the matter is listed today for orders regarding non-compliance of office objections, none appe aed. on behalf of the petitioners. T herefore, 7 perused the papers. 2} This petition is fed under Seétion . 438 (tb) of Cr.P.C. seeking to modify or replace: the words 'Learned JMFC /Magistrate" by ws ards" "Learned 'Sessions Judge" in the bail order passed by the 'session 'Court and to direct the Sessions Court to accept the sureties as per the bail order arid te. 'issue release order for release of the petitioners. ° os - 3) The petitioners have been arraigned as Accused Nos.2, 3.5, 87 & 8 in Crime No. 60/10 of Doddaballapur Tews Police = station register ed. for the: offerice 'punishable under Section 394 of PC. During investigation of the said'
- Ne the petitioners were apprehended and subjected to | _ judicial custody. They moved the leaned Sessions Judge. for ball winder Section 489. of CrP. in Cri. Mise, No.432/ 2011, which came to be made over to Fast Track \ 4 Court. DodddabaNapur. The said petition came "be alowed by order dated 20.04.2011 and the- onde! were ordered to be released on bail on their executing personal bonds and surety bonds for Rs.10,060/- tothe satisfaction of the learned JMFC. It appears, betore the -- petitioners could furnish sureties: the matter was committed to the Court of Sessions as the offence alleged was exclusively. iva iMe by the: Court of Sessions and the case had been register ed: a8 'sc No.1 16/2011 and it had been made 'Stekto the Fast Track Cou at Doddaballapur, the Court : which ™ originally passed the bail order. Thereafter, oni 05.05.29 Ly, the petitioners through their | advocate prodniced the copy of the bail order passed in Cri. Misc: No. 432/ 201. 1 and also furnished sureties and sought f hott acceptance by the learned Sessions Judge. However, Set riously,-the learned Sessions Judge refused to accept the : suretics and to order release of the petitioners from custody . on the sround that in the order of bail passed by the "Sessions Court, the direction was to the Magistrate to accept sureties and to release the accused and not to the Pea ET EE SE Sessions Court. Under these circumstances. the petitioners have presented this petition seeking modification Of the | order and their release. Perusal ol the order passed mm Cri, Misc. No.432/201]1 and the order dated 05.05.20! I. passed. in S.C. No.1 16/2011 indicates that the very same learned Judge who passed the bail order rdering réledise of the petitioners on bail on each of them execu ting personal bond and furnishing. Surety to thé satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. ih as refused "te "release the petitioners [rom custody by acenpting sureties thou gh the case had been committed: to' the Court of Sessions, It is rather astonishing to see that the very judge who had passed the order, has
- refused to implement his own order. May be at the time of passing bail order, the mater was still pending before the learned GMPC. However, before the petitioners could "approach the learned Magistrate, the matter was committed tothe Court of Sessions. Under those circumstances, the _jeurned Sessions Judge ought to have considered the acceptance of the surety furnished by the accused persons :
ae 6 direction was only to JMFC to accept the surety and: to release the accused persons.
4) Having regard to the facts and circumstances. of the case, the leamed Sessions Judge is directed to.
consider the request of the petitioners and if the surety furnished by the petitioners is acceptable, the learned Sessions Judge shall proceed to. accept the surety and order release of (he accusea. persons.
With the above Gbservations. the petition is disposed of.
Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the z
- concerned olf Cer, * OR om