Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1649 (KAR)

Mohan v. State Of Karnataka

2020-09-02

K.NATARAJAN

body2020
JUDGMENT K. Natarajan, J. - This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') for granting anticipatory bail in crime No.82/2020 registered by Mulbagal Rural Police for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of Shivanna, the respondent-Police registered the case against accused No.1-Vinod and these petitioners. It is alleged by the informant-Shivanna in his complaint that on 01.07.2020, in the evening, there was a quarrel between 1st petitioner and the complainant. That on 02.07.2020, at about 11 a.m., there was Panchayat held in presence of the elders. At about 11.30 a.m., when the complainant was standing near the house of Basappanavar. At that time, accused No.1-Vinod and these petitioners came near the complainant. Wherein, 2nd petitioner-Krishnamurthy brought a sword and accused No.1-Vinod took the sword from 2nd petitioner-accused No.3 and assaulted the complainant on his left hand. Then the complainant escaped from them and went to the hospital with the help of Munivenkatappa and others. After registering the case, accused No.1-Vinod has been arrested by the Police and he was granted bail. These petitioners moved the bail petition before the Sessions Court which came to be rejected. Hence, this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the injury sustained by the complainant was on the hand and assaulted by accused No.1 who was granted bail by the Sessions Judge. The allegation against these petitioners are lighter than the allegation made against accused No.1. The injured is already discharged from the hospital on 11.07.2020. Petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions. Hence, prayed for granting bail. 5. Learned High Court Government Pleader objected the bail petition. 6. On perusal of the records which goes to show that on the background of the quarrel between the complainant and one Manohar, 1st petitioner attempted to assault the complainant. Then on 02.07.2020, these petitioners and accused No.1 assaulted the informant- Shivanna and accused No.1 assaulted the injured Shivanna by taking the sword from accused No.3-2nd petitioner herein. The injury caused on the left hand of the complainant. The complainant has already discharged from the hospital on 11.07.2020. Then on 02.07.2020, these petitioners and accused No.1 assaulted the informant- Shivanna and accused No.1 assaulted the injured Shivanna by taking the sword from accused No.3-2nd petitioner herein. The injury caused on the left hand of the complainant. The complainant has already discharged from the hospital on 11.07.2020. Co-accused No.1 has already granted bail by the Sessions Judge. The recovery might have done by the Police from accused No.1. There is nothing remains to be recovered from these petitioners. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, by imposing certain conditions, if the anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, no prejudice would cause for the prosecution case. Therefore, I pass the following: ORDER Criminal petition is allowed . The respondent-Mulbagal Rural Police, Kolar District is directed to release the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 3 on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.82/2020 subject to the following conditions:- i) Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. ii) Petitioners shall surrender themselves before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order of this Court. iii) Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly; iv) Petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offences; v) Petitioners shall be deemed custody for the purpose of any recovery under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; and vi) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for the purpose of investigation.