Karnataka High Court
Devaraj Naika vs State Of Karnataka on 7 June, 2018
Author: John Michael Cunha
Bench: John Michael Cunha
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF JUNE 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3069 OF 2018
A/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3070 OF 2018
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3069 OF 2018
BETWEEN:-
DEVARAJ NAIKA
S/O LATE KESHAVA NAIKA,
AGED 22 YEARS,
2ND YEAR B.A.STUDENT,
Y.E.RANGAIAH SHETTY GOVT FIRST GRADE COLLEGE,
PAVAGADA,
R/O JAJURAYANAHALLI,
RANGANATHAPURA,
KASABA HOBLI,
PAVAGADA TALUK-572116. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: M SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY PAVAGADA P.S.
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU-560001.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI:NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C
PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.02/2018 OF PAVAGADA P.S., TUMKURU DISTRICT FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 380,454, 457 OF
IPC.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3070 OF 2018
BETWEEN:-
DEVARAJ NAIKA
S/O LATE KESHAVA NAIKA
AGED 22 YEARS,
2ND YEAR B.A.STUDENT,
Y.E.RANGAIAH SHETTY,
GOVT FIRST GRADE COLLEGE,
PAVAGADA
R/O JAJURAYANAHALLI, RANGANATHAPURA,
KASABAHA HOBLI, PAVAGAD TALUK-572116.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: M SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY PAVAGAD P.S.
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI: K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C
PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
3
CR.NO.74/2018 OF PAVAGADA P.S., TUMKURU DISTRICT FOR
THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 380,457 OF IPC.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Both these petitions are filed by a common petitioner seeking bail under section 439 Cr.P.C.
2. In Crl.P.No.3069/2018, FIR is registered against the petitioner in Cr.No.2/2018 under sections 380, 454 and 457 of IPC on the allegation that the petitioner and accused No.1 robbed 25 laptops from Y.E.Rangaiah Shetty Government First Grade College, Pavagada. The petitioner was arrested on 08.03.2018. In the said case, stolen laptops are alleged to have been recovered at the instance of accused No.1.
In Crl.P.No.3070/2018, F.I.R in Cr.No.74/2018 is registered against unknown persons alleging that on 06.03.2018, one Outdoor IP Bullet surveillance camera 2.8-12 mm with built in IR with built-in panic alerts with auto connectivity, IP dome surveillance camera 2.8-12 mm with built in IR with built-in panic alerts with auto connectivity, outdoor IP 360 24x mp 4 degree rotation panoramic day night network surveillance camera, UPS KVA 2 batteries and Cat 6e cable, conduit/causing capping with gatta, screws were stolen from the Government ladies hostel, Pavagada. In this case, the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2. He was arrested on 08.03.2018 and from his possession, all the above articles were recovered.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP. Learned HCGP has not filed any statement of objections opposing the petitions, but has orally opposed the petitions.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a student studying B.A., IV semester in Pavagada. He has been granted anticipatory bail and after the expiry of term of bail, he himself surrendered and he did not misuse the liberty given to him and no other case has been registered against the petitioner. Since incriminating evidence is already recovered, the custody of the petitioner is not required to be extended and hence, he seeks for release of the petitioner on bail on such terms and conditions found proper by this Court. 5
5. Learned HCGP however opposes the petitions and submits that the petitioner is involved in two similar cases. The offences alleged against the petitioner are serious in nature. Recovery having been effected at the instance of the petitioner, it cannot be said that he has been falsely implicated and therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
6. Having considered the submissions and on going through the material, it is seen that substantial investigation is completed and robbed articles are already recovered. The petitioner has been in custody for substantial period of time. The petitioner has not misused the interim liberty granted to him and therefore there cannot be any apprehension that the petitioner will flee from justice. As he is pursuing his studies, it is not proper to extend the custody of the petitioner solely by way of punishment. For all these reasons, petitions are allowed.
7. Accordingly, the criminal petitions are allowed.
a) Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) in each case 6 (Cr.No.02/2018 and Cr.No.74/2018) with one surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer or court as and when required.
c) Petitioner shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses in whatsoever manner.
d) Petitioner shall not get involved in similar offences.
e) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Trial Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE *mn/-