Karnataka High Court
Gangadhara vs State By Hsr Layout Police on 18 January, 2014
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7127/2013
BETWEEN:
Gangadhara,
S/o. Ramappa Kolkar,
Aged 28 years,
R/a Vajramathi Village,
Mudhol Taluk,
Bagalkot District-08354. .. PETITIONER
(By Smt. Padmavathi. N, Adv.)
AND:
State by H.S.R Layout
Police,
Bangalore-560 048. .. RESPONDENT
(By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP)
This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of the
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in S.C.
No.711/2013 which is pending before the XVI Addl. City
Civil and S.J., and C/C F.T.C.-8, Bangalore and Cr.
No.20/2013 of H.S.R. Layout P.S., Bangalore City, for the
offences punishable under Sections 498(A)(b)(c) R/W 34 of
IPC in crime No. 20/2013 etc.
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court
made the following :
2
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the offence punishable under Section 498(A)(B)(C) R/W Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.20/2013.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 10.1.2013, at about 3.45 P.M., the complainant N.T. Srinivas Reddy had received credible information that two persons of Bagalkot are coming to Ring View Hotel at Bangalore near Ibbaloor, by carrying Counterfeit currency notes to use the same at Bangalore as genuine. The complainant called two panchas, informed them about the said information, along with his staff and panch witness at 4.00 p.m., had gone to Ring View Hotel, Bangalore, and thereafter, at that time two persons came near the said hotel. The complainant suspected them and caught hold of those persons. On enquiry, the said persons told their name as Gangadhara and Ashok who are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in this case. Accused No.1- Petitioner herein was carrying one box. They opened the 3 said box and found counterfeit currency notes of face value of Rs.1,000/- each, totally Rs.6,00,000/- counterfeit currency notes. The complainant seized the same by conducting the Mahazer. On enquiry, accused NOs.1 and 2 gave voluntary statement telling the names of other accused persons. On the basis of the said complaint, the case was registered by the respondent police.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner- accused No.1 and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent State.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, during the course of the arguments, submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and absolutely, no case is made out by the prosecution under Section 489(A) and (B) and (C) of Cr.P.C. Perusal of the materials on record and even assuming for the sake of arguments, it is clear that there may be an offence under section 489(C), which is bailable in nature. He also submitted that in this case the complainant has lodged the complaint and he himself is the investigating officer. Hence, she submitted that this is 4 against the provisions of law and illegal. She submitted that accused Nos.2 to 5 are already released on bail. Hence, on the ground of parity, the present petitioner is entitle to be released on bail.
5. As against this, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, during the course of the arguments, submitted that accused Nos.1 and 2 were caught read handed when they were carrying fake and counterfeit notes and the said notes were seized in the presence of panch witnesses by the investigating officer. Since the offence alleged against the petitioner is a serious in nature, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
6. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and the other materials on record. I have also perused the copy of the charge sheet and the order passed by the court below on bail application. Perusal of the averments made in the complaint and also from the case of the prosecution it is clear that the counterfeit currency notes were seized from the possession of the accused persons. The other accused persons were ordered to be released on 5 bail by the order of this Court. Therefore looking to the materials on record, I am of the opinion that on the ground of parity, the present petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail. The offences are not punishable for death or imprisonment for life. The investigation of the case is already complete and charge sheet is also filed. The only apprehension of the prosecution that if the bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond and he may tamper the prosecution witnesses, reasonable conditions can be imposed on the petitioner and if there is violation of any of the conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail. Therefore, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail of the offence punishable under Section 498(A)(B)(C) R/W Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.20/2013 , subject to following conditions:-
I. The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) and shall offer a surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of jurisdictional Court.6
II. The petitioner shall not intimidate or tamper with prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
III. The petitioner shall attend the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Cs/-