Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 848 (KAR)

Nanda Kumar v. State Of Karnataka

2020-05-08

MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State. 2. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to enlarge him on anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.22/2019 of Marikuppam Police Station. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed against five accused persons for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 307, 323, 324, 341, 504, 506 R/W SEC. 149 of IPC. 3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 25.06.2018 there was a quarrel between the victim namely Rahul and one Karthik, who is arraigned as accused No.2 in the charge sheet. In the said quarrel, the said Karthik suffered bleeding injuries and in this regard, a case was registered in Marikuppam police station against Rahul and his friends. Since then, there was enmity between Rahul and Karthik. It is the further case of the prosecution that on 14.09.2019 at about 9.45 p.m., Karthik along with other accused persons having formed an unlawful assembly, assaulted Rahul with deadly weapons and caused bleeding injuries to him. 4. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.3 in the charge sheet. Absconding charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner in CC No.143/2020 on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC Court, KGF. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no enmity between the petitioner and Rahul. However, he is implicated in a false case only because he is a friend of accused No.2 Karthik. He submits that the petitioner was not at all present at the spot at the time of the incident. He further submits that the injured has already been discharged from the hospital and other accused have been enlarged on bail. Accordingly, seeks to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently contends that the name of the petitioner finds a place in the FIR. The injured has suffered grievous injuries. The petitioner has been absconding through out and therefore, he is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 7. The petitioner is shown as accused No.2 in the FIR and he is shown as accused No.3 in the charge sheet. The allegation against the petitioner is that he snatched the chopper from the hands of accused No.3 and assaulted on the both hands of the injured. 7. The petitioner is shown as accused No.2 in the FIR and he is shown as accused No.3 in the charge sheet. The allegation against the petitioner is that he snatched the chopper from the hands of accused No.3 and assaulted on the both hands of the injured. The weapons used in the commission of offence are recovered from other accused. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was falsely implicated and he was not present at the spot at the time of the incident. 8. The injured in the present case has been discharged from the hospital. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the other accused have been enlarged on bail. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. In the said circumstances, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail by imposing conditions. Accordingly, I pass the following : ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.22/2019 of Marikuppam police station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 307, 323, 324, 341, 504, 506 R/W SEC. 149 of IPC, he shall be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions : (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of ten days from today and shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1 Lakh (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. (ii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation of the case. (iii) The petitioner shall mark his attendance at the concerned police station on every second Sunday between 10.00 a.m., and 4.00 p.m., for a period of three months from today. (iv) He shall not leave jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission. (v) The petitioner shall be regular in attending the trial proceedings. (vi) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and shall not hamper the prosecution case in any manner. (vii) If any of the above conditions are violated, then the prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of this bail order. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the petitioners counsel via e-mail.