Karnataka High Court
Sunil S/O Venkatesh Dhanwad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 August, 2016
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.201007/2016
Between
Sunil S/o Venkatesh Dhanwad
Age: 21 years
Occ: Coolie
R/o Darbar Galli, Vijayapur
...Petitioner
(By Sri Shivanand V. Pattanashetti, Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka
R/by Addl. SPP Kalaburagi Bench
(Through Gol-Gumbaz Police Station
District Vijayapur)
...Respondent
(By Sri Sheshadri Jaishankar M. HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to grant
the regular bail to the petitioner/accused No.1 in Gol-
Gumbaz Police Station Vijayapura Crime No.117/2016
pending on the file of the Prl. CJM Court at Vijayapur,
which is registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 143, 364(A) read with 149 of IPC.
2
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the
Court made the following:
ORDER
This is the petition filed by the petitioner - accused no.1 U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., seeking his release on bail of the alleged offences punishable U/Sec.143, 364-A R/w 149 of IPC registered in respondent police station Crime No.117/2016.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner - accused no.1 and learned HCGP for the respondent - State.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the father of the child is the complainant in this case, wherein, he has stated that the alleged offence took place on 22.6.2016 when the child of the complainant by name Aditya left the house at 3.00 p.m., taking the meals to his father towards his shop, then he has not at all reached to the shop and somebody kidnapped him. The other averment in the complaint goes to show that the complainant received the phone message through the 3 mobile phone. The number which is mentioned in the complaint is his mobile phone demanding ransom of Rs.8.00 lakhs for the release of his son and he has agreed to pay Rs.5.00 lakhs. Other averment made in the complaint goes to show that he has arranged Rs.5.00 lakhs and he was waiting for the persons to call him over phone, to come and receive the amount and to get release his son. But, in the meanwhile he has received the phone call from his house stating that his son has come to the house. On the basis of the said complaint, case came to be registered against the petitioner and other accused persons for the said offences.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner made the submission that the phone call said to have been made to the complainant is not the phone number of the present petitioner. The only allegation against the present petitioner is that two persons were taking the boy in Auto Rickshaw and the present petitioner was moving on his two wheeler vehicle behind the said auto 4 rickshaw. Except this, there is no other allegation against the present petitioner. Hence the learned counsel submitted that there is no prima-facie material to show that the petitioner committed the alleged offence punishable U/Sec.364-A of IPC.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP made the submission that the allegations in the complaint goes to show involvement of the present petitioner also in committing the alleged offence. Alleged offence is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, he submitted that petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produced in the case and also the bail Order passed by IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Vijayapura and by that Order bail has been granted to the other accused persons but the bail petition of the present petitioner has been rejected. Looking to the allegations in the complaint, as it is rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the 5 petitioner herein that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he was moving on his two wheeler vehicle behind the auto rickshaw. Petitioner contended that he is innocent and he has not committed the alleged offences and ready to abide by any conditions for releasing him on bail. As per the complaint averments, when the complainant was waiting to give money to the persons who called him over phone, at that time, he received the phone call from his residence stating that child is in the house. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that, as the other accused persons were already ordered to be released on bail, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner - accused no.1 can be admitted to bail.
Accordingly, petition is allowed.
Petitioner - Accused no.1 is ordered to be released on bail of the above offences, subject to the following conditions :-
6
(1) Petitioner has to execute personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(2) He shall not tamper any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly. (3) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court concerned without its prior permission. (4) He shall attend the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/-
JUDGE SGS