Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 303 (KAR)

D. Chidananda And Others v. State Of Karnataka

2020-02-03

SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for grant of regular bail in respect of Crime No.185/2019 registered in Brucepet Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 394, 364A, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC. 2. It is contended that one Chandrashekar the complainant had filed a complaint against the accused persons stating that on 18.11.2019 about 5.30 p.m., when the complainant was near Vasai Kalyan Mantapa, Ballari, accused Nos.1 and 2 asked him to come near Murari building on Bengaluru-Ballari road and when the complainant went near the said building the accused had kidnapped the complainant, took the complainant near Pawan Hotel situated at Ananthapura road, where he was abused in filthy language stating that he has caused huge loss to accused by informing the police regarding illegal selling of PDS rice. 3. It is alleged that accused forcibly took his mobile phone and forced the complainant to call his house demanding Rs.11,00,000/- in cash as also snatched the gold ornaments from the complainant and while the accused where under the influence of alcohol, the complainant escaped from them. 4. On this basis Crime No.185/2019 came to be registered on 19.11.2019 at 10.10 a.m. Today, the petitioners have produced a further statement made by the complainant on 19.11.2019. In this statement, the complainant has retracted the allegations with regard to Rs.2,24,000/- and gold ornaments. He submits that on his return from the police station, after filing the complaint, he found a sum of Rs.2,24,000/- in the secret pocket of trouser. It is also stated that the complaint made by him as regards stealing of gold ornaments is also wrong since on that day, he had left them on home and not worn them. 5. The accused had filed an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for grant of bail in Crime NO.185/2019 before the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, at Ballari, which came to be rejected on 13.12.2019 by the said Court in Crl.M.P.No.1022/2019, for the reason that there was prima facie material to show the committance of the above offences. Unfortunately, the petitioners were unable to produce the further statement given by the complainant on 19.11.2019 before the Sessions Court since they came to know about it subsequently and thereafter obtained a copy thereof. Unfortunately, the petitioners were unable to produce the further statement given by the complainant on 19.11.2019 before the Sessions Court since they came to know about it subsequently and thereafter obtained a copy thereof. Hence, the Sessions Court did not have the benefit of the further statement where much of the allegations made by the complainant have been retracted. 6. Virtually by way of statement much of allegations of the offences alleged against the accused have been given up by the complainant in his further statement given before the police authorities. 7. In view of the above and taking into consideration that the investigation is at advanced stage and charge sheet would be filed very soon, this Court is of the opinion that the accused are required to be enlarged on bail. The petition filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed with the following conditions; (a) The petitioner Nos.1 to 4 would appear before the Brucepet police station on every Sunday of the week until dispensed with by the police station. (b) The petitioner Nos.1 to 4 shall furnish a bond bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the said court. (c) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigating officer in further investigation. (d) The petitioners shall not tamper with any evidence or threaten any witnesses of the prosecution. (e) The petitioners shall furnish a list of immovable properties owned by them to the police station.