Karnataka High Court
Sunil K vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 March, 2019
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF MARCH, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.18/2019
BETWEEN:
Sunil K.,
S/o Kempegowda N.,
Aged about 21 years
R/at No.169, 7th Main
7th Cross, MTB Area
Jayanagara 9th Block
Bengaluru-560 056.
...Petitioner
(By Sri Chandrahasa Rai B., Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka
by Bannerghatta Police Station
Bengaluru Rural
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Bengaluru-560 001.
...Respondent
(By Sri M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event
of his arrest in Crime No.173/2017 registered by
Bannerghatta Police Station, Bengaluru District, for the
offence punishable under Section 364(A) of Indian Penal
Code.
-2-
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day
the Court made the following:-
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by petitioner/ accused No.5 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to release him on anticipatory bail in Crime No.173/2017 of Bannerghatta Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 364(A) of Indian Penal Code.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 10.10.2017 at about 7.30 a.m. complainant went to the police station and filed the complaint alleging that on 9.10.2017 at about 2.30 p.m. the friend of her son Sujith called her over the phone and informed that they have been trapped in a ganja case and in order to release them they are demanding Rs.3,00,000/- and immediately he cut the phone and thereafter she informed the same to her husband and -3- obtained an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from one Nagaraja from her place and another sum of Rs.50,000/- from her relatives and she came to Bengaluru and made an enquiry with her brother Sunil and Sunil informed that in order to release her son they are demanding money who have kidnapped her son. He also told that he has to file a complaint. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that already accused Nos.2 and 6 have been released on bail and on the ground of parity the petitioner/accused is also entitled to be released on bail. He further submitted that no recovery has been made at the instance of the accused. Already charge sheet has been filed and the petitioner/accused has been implicated in the said case. On the basis of the voluntary statement said to have been given by accused Nos.1 and 2, there are no material to connect the accused to the alleged crime. He has neither demanded any ransom nor he was present at -4- the place of incident. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused is absconding and he is not available for investigation and interrogation. He further submitted that the petitioner/accused has also taken active part which is considered to be a heinous offence and demanded the ransom. If petitioner/accused is enlarged on bail, he may abscond and he may not be available for the trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the contents of the complaint and other materials it indicates that the name of the petitioner/accused is not found in the complaint or other -5- material and even the records indicates that already accused Nos.2 and 6 have been released on bail by this Court in Criminal Petition Nos.832/2018 and 3760/2018 by order dated 11.4.2018 and 8.6.2018. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Already charge sheet has been filed and if the petitioner/accused is ordered to surrender before the Court then he will be available for investigation or trial. Under the said facts and circumstances, I feel that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.
8. In the light of the discussions held by me above, the petition is allowed and petitioner/accused No.5 is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.173/2017 of Bannerghatta Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 364(A) of Indian Penal Code, subject to the following conditions.
i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.-6-
ii) He shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from today.
iii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iv) He shall mark his attendance in the jurisdictional police once in 15 days between 10.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M. till the trial is concluded.
v) He shall attend the Court till the trial is concluded.
vi) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission of the Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE *AP/-