Balamurugan @ Kariya Balu, vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 July, 2018

[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Balamurugan @ Kariya Balu, vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 July, 2018

Bench: John Michael Cunha

                             1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF JULY, 2018

                       BEFORE

  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA


        CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4103/2018


BETWEEN:

Balamurugan @ Kariya Balu,
S/o Thangavelu,
Aged about 30 years,
R/a No.1733, 41st 'A' Cross,
Grapes Garden, Jayanagara,
Bengaluru - 560 004.
                                           ...Petitioner
(By Sri.Chandrappa K.N, Advocate)

AND:

The State of Karnataka by
Jayanagara Police Station.
                                        ...Respondent
(By Sri.K.Nageshwarappa, 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.218/2017
(C.C.No.2487/2018) of Jayanagar Police Station,
Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections
399 and 402 of IPC.
                            2


       This Criminal petition coming on for Orders,
this day, the court made the following:

                        ORDER

The petitioner has sought for an order of anticipatory bail in Crime No.218/2017.

2. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet is laid against 6 accused persons under Sections 399 and 402 of IPC. Petitioner and accused Nos.4, 5 and 6 are shown as absconding.

3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader.

4. Learned High Court Government Pleader has not filed any statement of objections but has orally opposed the petition.

5. Learned HCGP submits that no other cases are registered or pending against the petitioner. 3

6. The case of the prosecution is that accused Nos.1 and 2 were caught making preparation to commit dacoity on 23.07.2017 at 08.30 p.m. Petitioner herein came to be implicated solely on the basis of the voluntary statement of accused Nos.1 and

2. There is nothing on record to indicate that the investigating agency has made any effort to secure the petitioners during investigation. In that view of the matter, by the submission of the charge sheet, the petitioner does not forfeit his right under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

7. Having regard to the nature of the allegations made against the petitioner and the character of evidence that is collected in proof of the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged offence, petitioner deserves to be admitted to bail. Hence, the following:

ORDER Criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Jurisdictional Court within 15 days from the date of this order and on his appearance, the Court shall enlarge him on bail on the same day subject to the following conditions:-

a. The petitioner shall furnish a bond in a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh (Rupees One lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Court;

b. The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required;

c. The petitioner shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses.

Sd/-

JUDGE dn/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court