Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 176 (KAR)

Sachin And Another v. State Of Karnataka

2020-01-21

ASHOK S.KINAGI

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. This petition is filed by the petitioners being aggrieved by the order dated 13.12.2019 in Crl.Misc.No.2646/2019 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Belagavi. 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 15.11.2019 at about 10.00 a.m. when the complainant was near Radio Complex, Belagavi, he met accused No.4, and accused No.4 showed the photo of accused No.2-Deepa and asked him to come to the house of accused No.1. It is further alleged that, at about 9.00 p.m., complainant went to the house of accused No.1, at that time, accused No.4 introduced accused No.2 to the complainant and they were sent to one room and at that time, accused No.4 took the photograph of both complainant and accused No.2. It is further alleged that, on 16.11.2019 at about 11.00 a.m. when complainant was in his home he received a phone call and he was asked to come to the house of accused No.1. When complainant came to the house of accused No.1, he was showed with the photographs and complainant was threatened stating that they would make photographs viral and demanded Rs.50,000/- from the complainant. The accused snatched the mobile phone of the complainant and he was seriously threatened. On 22.11.2019 when the complainant has been to the house of accused No.1 to pay Rs.5,000/-, at that time, the accused snatched the mobile phone and demanded balance amount of Rs.45,000/- or else the accused threatened of dire consequence of publishing the photographs. Thereafter, the complainant informed the incident to his brother and filed a complaint against the accused. On the basis of the compliant, a case in crime No.153/2019 came to be registered for the offence punishable under Sections 384 and 395 of IPC. During the course of investigation, petitioners were arrested on 22.11.2019 and they have remanded to the judicial custody. The petitioners filed bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. before the trial Court and the trial Court rejected the said bail application vide order dated 13.12.2019. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have filed this petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were arrested on 22.11.2019 and no allegations are made against the petitioners. Further, there is no demand made by the petitioners. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have filed this petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were arrested on 22.11.2019 and no allegations are made against the petitioners. Further, there is no demand made by the petitioners. The only allegation made against the petitioners is that, they were present at the time of the incident and in fact there is no role in committing the alleged offence. 5. Per contra, the learned HCGP submits that, charge sheet is not yet been filed and the matter is under investigation. The presence of the petitioners is required for investigation and prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. Perused the records. From perusal of the records, it is seen that there are no allegations against the petitioners except stating that they were present at the time of alleged incident. Further, there is no allegation against these petitioners that they have demanded amount from the complainant. Further, accused No.1 was released on bail in Crl.Misc.No.2664/2019 vide order dated 13.12.2019 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Belagavi. Though the petitioners do not stand on the same footing and the allegations made against accused No.1, still the trial Court allowed the bail application filed by accused No.1. Whether petitioners have committed offences alleged or not, it needs elaborate trial. If the petitioners are detained in custody, no purpose would be served. If the bail is granted by putting certain stringent conditions, ends of justice will be met. Petitioners have made out grounds for grant of bail. Hence, the following: ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail in crime No.153/2019 of Market Police Station on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate and subject to the following conditions. i) The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. ii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer in the investigation of this case. iii) The petitioners shall not involve themselves in any offence. iv) The petitioners shall mark their attendance before the SHO Market Police Station on the last Sunday of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m until charge sheet is filed in this case.