Karnataka High Court
Manikandan Periyasamy vs State By Hiriyur Rural Police Station on 16 February, 2018
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1030/2018
BETWEEN:
1. Manikandan Periyasamy @ Mani
S/o Periyasamy
Aged about 32 years
R/at No.3/52, Pacha Gounder Street
Tirumalagiri
Salem Taluk and District
Tamil Nadu-636 307.
2. Thirunavukarasu Subrayan
S/o Subrayan
Aged about 29 years
R/at No.111-1/75
Valluvar Street
Thirumalagiri
Salem Taluk and District
Tamil Nadu-636 307. ... PETITIONERS
(By Smt Bhageerathi L, Adv.
for Sri Bhojaraja, Adv.)
AND:
State by Hiriyur Rural Police Station
Represented by the
State Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka
Bangalore-560 001. ...RESPONDENT
2
(By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.
No.295/2017 of Hiriyur Rural P.S., Chitradurga District, for
the offence P/U/S 397 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail for the offence punishable under Section 397 of IPC, registered in respondent - police station Crime No.295/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 16.7.2017 at about 4.30 a.m. the complainant along with his friend Machendra Namadev Pawar and the driver were proceeding in a car to go to Rajesh Jewelers, Sollapura District, Maharashtra in order to sell the silver articles which they were carrying in the car, weighing about 41 kgs kept in the dickey of the car. 3 When they were so proceeding, one white colour car was following them and overtook the car of the complainant and stopped in front of the car of the complainant. Two persons went on the side of the driver of the car of complainant and damaged the glass of the car, three persons came on the left side where the complainant was sitting and damaged the car. They assaulted the complainant and others with knife and other weapons and caused injuries and have taken away the silver articles. On the basis of the said complaint, case was registered for the above said offences.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.
5. Earlier these two petitioners had approached this Court and this Court by order dated 26.10.2017 in Crl.P.No.7363/2017 disposed of the bail petition with liberty to file fresh bail petition before the concerned Court after filing of the charge sheet. I have perused the said order. After completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet petitioners again moved the concerned Sessions Court, however, the said petition also came to be rejected.
6. It is the specific case of the complainant that they were carrying 41 kgs. of silver articles in the dickey of the car. But in the further statement of the complainant he has stated that totally they were 5 transporting 229 kgs. of silver articles in the dickey of the car. Learned counsel for the petitioners drew the attention of this Court to the further statement of the complainant and submitted that it shows that the silver articles belonging to other persons were also being transported in the car of the complainant, which was not at all stated in the original complaint. A false case has been made out against the petitioners. Though it is the case of the prosecution that complainant's driver and another person were also assaulted with knife and other weapons and they also sustained injuries taken treatment at a hospital in Krishnagiri, no material is produced by the prosecution to support the said contention that they have sustained the said injuries.
7. As per the prosecution material, there is a recovery of silver articles from the petitioners to the tune of 13 kgs, but it is their case that the said 13 kgs. 6 of silver articles is melted and when it was seized, it was not in the original form. All these allegations are denied by the petitioners contending that false allegations are made against them and that they never involved in committing the alleged offence. Even there is no proper identification of the petitioners in the said case. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. Petitioners are ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by the Court and from the date of arrest petitioners are in custody. The alleged offence under Section 397 of IPC is also not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioners may be admitted to regular bail.
8. Accordingly, petition is allowed.
Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are ordered to be 7 released on bail for the offence punishable under Section 397 of IPC, registered in respondent - police station Crime No.295/2017, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each and furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioners shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/-
JUDGE bkp