Sri Ravindra @ Ravi Zomato Ravi vs State Of Karnataka on 7 February, 2022

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Ravindra @ Ravi Zomato Ravi vs State Of Karnataka on 7 February, 2022

Bench: H.P. Sandesh

                            1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                         BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

              CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9716/2021

BETWEEN:

SRI RAVINDRA @ RAVI @ ZOMATO RAVI,
S/O AMBRESH,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT JALWADGI,
DIDDGI SINDHNUR, RAICHUR.
KARNATAKA 584138.                              ...PETITIONER

            (BY SRI ANGADI CHETAN B, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY BASAVESHWARANAGAR P.S,
REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU.                                    ...RESPONDENT

               (BY SRI VINAYAKA V.S., 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 CR.NO.167/2021 OF
BASAVESHWARA NAGAR P.S., BENGALURU CITY FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 364A, 385, 323, 504,
506 READ WITH 34 OF IPC.

     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                 2



                            ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in respect of Crime No.167/2021 registered by the Basaveshwara Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 364A, 385, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the accused persons kidnapped the complainant and assaulted him and abused in a filthy language and insisted him to part with the money and also caused life threat. Based on the complaint dated 11.08.2021, the case has been registered.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the name of the petitioner is not found in the FIR and also during the course of investigation, no material is collected against the petitioner. Only based on the statement of the co- accused that this petitioner was also present along with them, he 3 has been arraigned as an accused. The learned counsel submits that the other main accused persons against whom overt-act allegation is made have already been enlarged on bail and some of the accused persons have absconded and there is no any over-act allegations against this petitioner. The only allegation is that he was present along with the other accused persons.

5. The prosecution is mainly relying upon the voluntary statement of the other accused persons and no allegation of overt-act against this petitioner. When such being the factual aspects of the case, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. and there are no any criminal antecedents against the petitioner.

6. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.167/2021 registered by the Basaveshwara Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under 4 Sections 364A, 385, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for.

(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer without prior permission till the charge-sheet is filed or for a period of three months, whichever is earlier.

(v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., on 30th of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., before the 5 Investigating Officer for a period of three months or till the charge-sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.

Sd/-

JUDGE MD

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court