Saravanan S/O P Pandurangam vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 January, 2009

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Saravanan S/O P Pandurangam vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 January, 2009

m THE'. HIGH CQURT 0? }{A}2NATA}<7.5H""'»~~V.' 5 ' ' CiRC{.¥I'I' BENCH AT %1: gARw=A:3» "jjy. ';:)A'rEiJ '"i'H1S THE 27TH DAY:.A:0F:1J.é;r%4m.1i:ﬁf' « T E3EFiL'3_RE V THE HCWBLE MR JUs'i*i£§§: y.JAGA1§M*1*H':3N N0,7S}%;1 (2o03 CR§..P.T~%'C).74{}5I;'2_{§ff}8 cRL.P.Ne.74(3'S;'2;{§9sg =:

BE:rwi<:£:Ni_ V. ' Saravganan, S} :1) P.i?an:jii1:fa13ga}?n, Age: 41?. years, C}r.':};~..:u'l"r~:xt§.1c"E3usiness, R/0: M59, sa:,P1;2:g;a:, 4 RMS comy; Di1i:iuga1»* Main Road, Tric:}:1y'~1, Téxmﬂnatii-u. ..?ETITiONER iﬁﬁéjaswi, Advocate) 2008 33.1 vs git?-»_"€J"/T' ' R.VméH;5_ Si 0 Rajenﬁman, V V' _Ag<t abaut 26 years, Occz Driver, V» R /13:' N0.3/55:5, Antavar K011 tum, ' Garxdhinagar Area, T1*ic}1y, Tamﬂnadu. ..FE:TI'1'iC)fiiER (By Sri. '1'.V.Ganesh, Advocate ﬁn: 'I'.N.Bar Associate} Ix} AND:

The State of Karnataka, Reptd/ By' Brucepei P.S., ﬁﬂﬂﬂy. HRESHDﬁﬁEﬁ? n (Commonjxi 119411' Lcasejs) V' :

(BySﬁPHiG0&hmﬂLHCGH ~w» These criminal petitions 11112€i:::1'*' Cr.P.C. praying to allow _petiti<31:;_xs'V--and r.iiz~3,¢t 't};1é:e {rial Court to release: the pctitiom=:r'an bail {3ri.u1c':.__N'e».5]2(X}3~. p/u/S395 of I.P.C. of Brucefn-:_t'A'PoIics" St;-iiién Q11 bail by taking mquimd surctyfor the rt3:a so_I1s. _.stateé'2l31_t1;ej petition. These criminal pétiﬁoxish oxdcrs this day, the Court made the following: i ' ' '* f{C§DER _ fieaﬁii ﬁ1e ieé,t:1é€i' Counsel for the petitioners and V' _ l€'éﬁ'l€{i,(}1ilifE3IfI},];fE3.i'iT1'§;'§X€T1VOCa1;C for the State. "2;'*!ﬁ1c:;V.?'VV}s:;%'£iti0;1t:r's Counsel Srntlx/Iaxijuia N.T£:3'asWi is alsa assisﬁsﬁ by Sri '}'.V.Ganesh.

A' ' T116 pﬁtitioners who have bﬁfiﬂ éeclined bail by the Ceurt are befere this Court and it is eantendeé by the x " 1:>etiti<:>ners {lounge} that the petiticmcrs have been in custody far more than one veagr in respect cf a case mgistcrcd against them and five others in crime No.5] 2008 by Brucepéfrijolice Station, Bellazy for oﬁhnces §)1n1isha¥:)Ie under anai 395 of I. P. C. 4\ zfhc COQFI - ft, allﬁigi-J.'ti():1§_'§3;'jL».€'i:I1\&.-' Sfatﬁﬁi Cashier of Canara Bank, A/I2§i;x_vi~£§3zanc1:. Smt. . L' Ragaaudha Iodgad a c;o1np1ajV111;VV':ﬁ.?iti3& __V1;he "Felipe siiiaﬁng that amund 10.45 am. o:11"~9:§1_.A2'{){)E§b; :éhc was in the cash countcr, some four pcxx-;3:}12.$'Vcéa:1;1t:L?_thé1'e¢V she-xved a. knife: and fhréateﬁcgd r:>'iii*::~:1* thIvee: persons came ﬁmn backsidg aé(1(i::'§¢}3,c.of*thEI11 ShOW€d the knife and t.11e1'€aJ1'"'t€i"L"--£,1All'vtIV:3'<:__ 1i;1fi<:&}:$iv11 persons took away the cash Wiiifsthi to 1i§'i't:«v't1.I..I).c; of Rs.4,(}0,{}{}()/--. Thé said complaint ' ;1{)d.ged._V4Wiii2AV«'fhe Police ltzd to the case being Itgistereci and . '?§:{€3"€ the C. 133., Sandur Clix'-tile alongwitlil the help of went near the <:he(:l<~p<::«s3: anti found a t:rax' ., vehicla} and on stopping the: said vahicle, they Saw 'A"--:f?h}éAApersons running away and two persons in the vehicle x " 'Who arc: the two petitionﬁrs. After mtemogatihg the said accused persons, they were produced befcrna the % nJ jurisdictional Police. Later on, charge sheet fitedt against three persons including the present K

5. The submission of the 1€ati.1e{i N.'i'e3'aswi for the pestionef i;g"~:;r1.§§1eq.74ot2,12{:§::<3..;si that.' the trial Court }:t:jecte€§. the 'off_AthAe§ petitioner only on the ground. of tjje in similar bank robbery cases ;-:t.__othe'f' "secu;t'i:1g the case papers of have been produced it is only after arrest of the their names have been referred to in 1;e'sg_:dsect of and even in those cases, the petjﬁozxers liavftet ioeeéi granted bail by the respective Courts ptogress taken plaee in those cases 3136; fat the ';-jrese~1tt--«.v*'tI:1e submission made is that the complaint a§.1eg:§'£io1:s are V61}? improhable, in as much as no customer x has complained of the daooity taken piHC€ in the bank or any . " A V' --»pt{blic has qtgzstioned and the fact that the petitioners has L).-.5.-re, !\ been found in the trax when the Police came and stopped the vehicle itself indicates that petitioners were innocent, of the amount being found in the tzrax. Momover, the petitioner in ET»?

.3 Cr1.P.No.'?40§j'?.{)()8 who is accu$ed. No.2 is mn;;;;1g};;%§g;;:;;¢ business and in connection with coﬁectibn 0157. ' materials, he had come to Beﬁaxggf ~ he-«'xvas_A[ «.:5:.1 his:?1,vié;y back with his driver. The _ pr{5¢_§1ce{i«. Pﬁttitioner at Annexurezs 'E' t0""~L}"t0 the bﬁii '1I1sdicaté' that petitioner is nmziiﬁg a is a f3art11er in. M} 3. Asian 'I'ext;ile:~3 cgﬁtinued custody of gaetitioner is Lagidwgiqyvxi 't;§,-4' the Apex Court in respect c3i§'g:VI'é1*2.tV pgrscans. She submits that no Tl. "inf.-*:::s__ ;;o§idL1§:t:id.. it is only on the basis of Po1icéV'A_C}fﬁ:c<ér-3; this case and themfore relied on the ei7eea$1an-5 :§e;:s;14:,e§1' in (1977) 4 Sec: 308, 1994 (1r1.L.J. :2gs~i3.7,__A1;§ 2060' s§;113V53?, ELR 2008 KAR 4753, (2006) :2 sec:

' (cx1.}»%;399,_(:a<}:>7) :2 sec ($11.3 63:38, (200?) 1 SCC: (cm) 329, * km? :"9'"é923L:.s;f::':£2<3, 1997' (:1) Crrimes 357. L'éLs§§ei.$1iti 1I:[ission is made that the petitioner be raieased on n imposing suitable conditions and as far as the, ﬁdéﬁtioner being a habitual csffenﬂcr is concemeé, no material is piaced by the pI'0S€C11ﬁO¥1 that he has been convictad in } .9 any case eaﬁiar.

submission made is that petitioner in Cr1.F3.N'o.7E3}?};'4I'2§)08 also be released on bail by imposing conditions, »

7. The learned Govemment-Adv*ecat£: {3p.§3os§ed ' the case: that these pet.itim1ers i>1".i__%)'£}1v6I.f iike nature and thereibre V-;rjigui<2_;t'i}j»"vvréjectedV V the bail appiicatiml reﬁgrénce miade by the petitioners Counsel deflects in the izlvestigation c;.-;g31:1_ot 'Jstagc: to consicier the bail ﬁﬁﬁﬂonem are persons beloriging it is likely that they may absco11'£i'=ag11d these reasons, bail be rejected to, 1316 pctitio:1a;£$V.V' V. , 'A ., thus httani both sides and going through the H };éxper:§VV'V.pr0duc€d by the learned Cotmsei for tha taking into account the Law laid down by the V 'ﬁpgx Court with régard to grant of baii, in the instaﬁt case, 7.35 "far as the patitioners involvement in ether cases of like " nai:1.:r3 is csncernaéi, no material is piaced to show that the pﬁtitieners have been convicted of any eﬁénces of the said %' nature in the past and with regard to other cases 'to by the prosecution, there is no material p}.ace:1":'toV these peﬁtioners have ideiitiﬁed by the no A .

parade has been conducted ami; " pet§i'i:i(:¥ne'1':-;¢ Ciiuirisel submission that petitionersiihveive been gxaniied in" other' cases also has not been dispi}.teii'vhy'Vthe leamiegi Cievemment Advocate for the State'"e.1t1r£ a1;;a;:~t;. ._fiﬁ.s, ii is the case of the Police t1r1at_'z.11e peti1iio11eieiwe.iie at amund 12.30 noon on V61}? was itself lodged at about' V day. Second1y)ﬁ-iat these ggetifionere Wexfev the vehicle when the Police is . e 459:2 .I'c:., stopped the %ie}.1iC;--1e / also " gives an indication that, had these invo'1ve--:l----«in the alleged offences, like ethers, they V ﬂed like others. Though cash was stated to i' vehicle, which is a pubiic vehicle, there is no material to show that these persons were carrying the said " emolmt with them.

9. Apart from the above, insofar as petitioner in Cr1.P.No.'?40S/ 2008 is concerned, the éocuments produced by the petitioner at annexures T)' to 'L' aiso gives an e indication that the petitioner being involved... etexfile business as a partner. Therefore, there is some' fc-ice is iithie submission made by the ii®i1i1:n._se1' Nffejaswi that in all, likeiiiqopd ;)etitioiiers'vl:a{verb.ee11uL roped in because they were ifoéilld in the 'vejiiieiie ixfhen the Police stopped the ski faetiﬁ' 'ijtist incline;

me to consider the is that the petitioners ivyear and ndifmuch progress iﬁiezefore this is one of the faetogbs '11{i>:te.Def "instant case. As far as the appreiieiisioﬁ -- is concerned, conditions 99¢!-celsaeu 0,?

caJ§1__v'be iiﬂpbsed; ieiisure/63:16 prosecution interest of «sf the evidence and the petitioners abscdndiﬁg *:',0:1eeI'negi.

the ﬁght of the aforementiened reasons anii the .i:f;11i1igs¢I'ef£:§red to by the petitioners Couﬂsel, I am of the i that the petitioners case be reieased on bail by imposing eenditicms and hence i pass the tbilewing order. 3/» _ P 10 The above: petitions are anowed subject tc.-2' v.f¢n-{mmg conditions;

II.

The petitioners sha}1~be. érelééasﬁzfti;-'IunV"b.aii 'Qr1 their furnishing '15:' e'1IVS;%_J,'13{::;_of Rs.SO,(}()0/-- each wifhhvfwo s§:7i'ar§z§:14tA.s1iT;1"<§*:i€::si'~%» both of whom s1<;:g;;; be ;¢mi%%%ss;r¢:ii¢s% to me' trial Couriifs sati-$i'ax§;':iOi1;_ The: petitioTI3:t_:1'-é;" tamper 1316 pr-:)js6€:11ti.;<)12 V ' . % '£'ﬁe':'j'p§étit;i'017::férS shah not give tllreat to the witi:e'.§€-ﬁts nlanner;

" IV, '{;h-:3. 'p¢1:iti0z1ers shall mark their attendance 'heibre Bfﬁflﬁpﬁt Poiitre Station on every 15 % ' i.e., on 15th ané 30131 of even; moxrth at * time between 10.00 31.111. and 5.00 p.m.; The pet.itiToI::.ers shall not invoive ﬂzemseives in any affences of like nature in future and 3' 11 VI. The petitioners shall not ieav'€:L 1fh ei3' respective ijlaces Qszxcept ' atmndance at Belflatj} Police previeus pertrzissicsii df'._t11e.;'j1~ﬁ';s(iiCi:ioz1a1 Magistrat.e oftheir "

Violation of any of the ahové *»r_:_0;*::g;1itic§I1:a. ,$hgii give the prosecution the 1ibe:;t3'A"to fn_oj}r{2 f<§'fl'¢a:i1ce1}atio1'1 of bail.

' V.      .....

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court