Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 515 (KAR)

Chandrashekar v. State of Karnataka

2023-03-28

V SRISHANANDA

body2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER V Srishananda, J. - Heard Sri. Shashidhar G, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Vinayaka V.S., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the records. 2. Present petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. with the following prayer: 'Wherefore, the petitioners pray that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, in the event of their arrest in Crime No.157/2022 of Chikkajala Market Police Station, Bengaluru, which is pending on the file of Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC., Devanahalli, Bengaluru Rural District for the offence punishable u/s Section 379 of Indian Penal Code to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest, on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to impose in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.' 3. The brief facts of the case are as under: A complaint came to be lodged by Nadeem Khan S/o Eliyas Khan with Chikkajala Police Station on 06.12.2022, which was registered in Crime No.157/2022 for the offence punishable under Section 379 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC' for short). 4. The gist of the complaint averments reveal that the complainant is the owner of two Tipper vehicles and he had engaged the petitioners as the drivers to run the said tippers. Both the drivers were permanent residents of Rayanapalya, Surapura Taluk, Yadagiri District and they have been appointed about two months earlier to the date of complaint as drivers. The tippers were attached to a contractor for carrying on the contract work in respect of BMRCL. On 05.12.2022, since there was no piece work given to the petitioners' tippers, both tippers were parked. When the matter stood thus, the petitioners took away a tipper bearing Registration No.KA.03-AJ-8663 without the permission of the complainant to an unknown place. The complainant tried to contact the petitioners over their mobile telephones number, but both were put off. Thereafter, based on the GPRS, the tipper was traced. On so tracing the tipper, it is noticed that the tyres, the disks and the battery of the tipper were stolen away by the petitioners and wiring of the tipper were also cut off. 5. After registering the complaint, the police are investigated the matter. 6. Thereafter, based on the GPRS, the tipper was traced. On so tracing the tipper, it is noticed that the tyres, the disks and the battery of the tipper were stolen away by the petitioners and wiring of the tipper were also cut off. 5. After registering the complaint, the police are investigated the matter. 6. In the meantime, the petitioners were made the attempt for grant of anticipatory bail before the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Sitting at Devanahalli, was turned down by order dated 10.01.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.15365/2022. Thereafter, the petitioners are before this Court. 7. Reiterating the grounds urged in the bail petition Sri. Shashidhara G, learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the petitioners are innocent of the offence alleged against them and they are no way concerned to the alleged offence and sought for grant of anticipatory bail. 8. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader however opposes for grant of anticipatory bail by filing detailed written objections. 9. In the light of the rival contentions, this Court perused the materials on record meticulously. 10. On such perusal of the materials on record, it is seen that the tipper which was stolen away is traced by the investigation agency and however, the tyres, disks and the battery of the tipper were found missing. According to the complainant, the value of the tyres, disks and the battery is estimated at Rs.1,00,000/-. Whether at all the petitioners are responsible for thieving of those articles of the tipper or not are to be investigated by the investigation agency. 11. The materials on record disclose that the petitioners are not available to the investigation agency, despite their best efforts, as such the investigation is crippled. Directing the petitioners to join the investigation agency and undergo limited period of custodial investigation would meet the ends of justice. 12. Accordingly, without expressing further opinion on merits of the matter, the following order is passed. ORDER 1. The Criminal Petition is allowed. 2. Petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Agency on 05.04.2023 at about 10.00 a.m. 3. 12. Accordingly, without expressing further opinion on merits of the matter, the following order is passed. ORDER 1. The Criminal Petition is allowed. 2. Petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Agency on 05.04.2023 at about 10.00 a.m. 3. Investigation Officer is at liberty to take the accused/petitioners to custody and complete the custodial interrogation on the same day, before 6.00 p.m. and thereafter, enlarge the petitioners on bail on executing a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with Two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. 4. Petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency and in that regard directed that petitioner shall mark their attendance before the Investigating Officer on every alternate Sunday between 10.00 am and 2.00 pm., till the final report is filed. 5. Petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses in any manner. 6. Petitioners shall attend the Court regularly. If any of the above conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail. Ordered accordingly.