Sri. Yathin vs State Of Karnataka on 2 February, 2018

[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri. Yathin vs State Of Karnataka on 2 February, 2018

Bench: R.B Budihal

                            1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018
                        BEFORE
       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
          CRIMINAL PETITION No.281/2018
BETWEEN:

Sri. Yathin,
Aged 24 years,
S/o. Koti Poojary,
Resident of Bolpodi Mane,
Kudrebettu, Balthila Village,
Buntwala Taluk,
Dakshina Kannada - 574 253.                ... Petitioner

(By Sri. Vinod Kumar.M, Advocate)

AND:

State of Karnataka,
Represented by
Buntwala Town Police Station,
Buntwala,
Dakshina Kannada District.               ...Respondent

(By Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP)

      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
Cr.No.142/2017 of Buntwala Town Police Station, D.K.
District, for the offence p/u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 323,
324, 307, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC.
                               2



     This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following:

                           ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking his release on bail for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 307, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC, registered in respondent-police station Crime No.142/2017.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that false allegations are made against the present petitioner though he is not involved in committing the alleged offence. It is also submitted that the injured is already discharged from the hospital. The learned counsel submitted that accused No.1 has been already granted 3 bail by the order of this Court and he has produced the copy of the order dated 03.01.2018 in Criminal Petition No.9212/2017. The learned counsel submitted that now the investigation is complete and charge sheet is already filed. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions he may be enlarged on bail.

4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposed the petition on the ground that the petitioner is involved in four other cases and he is a rowdy sheeter. In this connection the learned HCGP produced the case file wherein it is mentioned that the present petitioner is a rowdy sheeter and there are many criminal cases. List is also furnished about four cases with criminal number and the offences. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produced in the case.

6. Looking to the prosecution material, at this stage prima facie goes to show the involvement of the present petitioner in other four criminal cases. Apart from this case it is also mentioned in the prosecution material that he is a rowdy sheeter. This goes to show that he is having a criminal antecedent and therefore, if he is released on bail, the possibility of he involved in committing the similar offence is not completely ruled out. Therefore, it is not a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner.

Hence, petition is hereby rejected.

Sd/-

JUDGE UN/LL

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court