Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 524 (KAR)

Narashimmaiah K H v. State of Karnataka

2023-03-29

V SRISHANANDA

body2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER V Srishananda, J. - Heard Sri.Appaji K.R., learned counsel for the petitioner 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 petitioner (Accused No.3) prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in CR.NO.411/2022 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 307 of I.P.C. of Respondent Byadarahalli police and also filed chargesheet in CC No.26636/2022 the offence was altered in chargesheet under section 143, 147, 148, 460, 395, 397, 212 R/W 149 of I.P.C. the above CC pending on the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court at Bengaluru Rural District in the above case, in the interest of justice." 3. The brief facts of the case are as under: One Vasantha G.Y., son of Yallaiah filed a complaint with Byadarahalli Police Station on 20.08.2022, which was registered in Crime No.411/2022, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC' for short) against the petitioner and other three accused persons. 4. The gist of the complaint averments reveals that in respect of the differences between the complainant and the first accused with regard to financial transaction on 19.08.2022, the petitioner was intimated by other accused persons to take away the life of the complainant. On 20.08.2022 at about 04.00 a.m., when wife of the complainant had been to neighbour house in order to hear discourse of "Shanimahathma story", at about 04.30 a.m., the petitioner and others went inside the house of the complainant, abused him and assaulted him. The overt act alleged against the present petitioner is that, he kicked the complainant in the bathroom. 5. Based on the complaint lodged, the Police registered the case and filed the charge sheet against the petitioner showing him as an absconding accused. 6. The attempt made by the petitioner to obtain an order of grant of anticipatory bail was turned down by the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District,d Bengaluru, in Crl.Misc.Petition No.2374/2022 dated 11.01.2023. Thereafter the petitioner is before this Court. 7. 6. The attempt made by the petitioner to obtain an order of grant of anticipatory bail was turned down by the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District,d Bengaluru, in Crl.Misc.Petition No.2374/2022 dated 11.01.2023. Thereafter the petitioner is before this Court. 7. Reiterating the grounds urged in the bail petition seeking for anticipatory bail, Sri.Appaji K.R., learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only allegation made against the petitioner is that he kicked the injured/complainant in bathroom and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 8. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes for grant of anticipatory bail. 9. This Court perused the materials on record meticulously, in the light of the rival contentions addressed on both sides. 10. On such perusal of the materials on record, it is seen that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this court. However, it was a regular bail. Admittedly, the petitioner is not available to the Investigating Agency all these days and efforts made by the Investigating Agency have rendered futile. 11. No doubt, the charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioner showing him as "accused absconding". In the absence of any criminal antecedents against the petitioner and he has approached the District Court for grant of anticipatory bail and thereafter is before this court, directing the petitioner to join the investigation and to undergo limited period of custodial investigation would meet the ends of justice. 12. Accordingly, without further discussion on the merits of the matter, this Court passes the following: ORDER 1. The Criminal Petition is allowed. 2. Petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Agency on 06.04.2023 at about 10.00 a.m.; 3. Investigation Officer is at liberty to take the accused / Petitioner to custody and complete the custodial investigation on the same day before 6.00 p.m., if any incriminating material is elicited in such custodial interrogation, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to make use of the same and file supplementary/additional report as is contemplated under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer is directed to release the petitioner by taking a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial court' 4. Petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency; 5. Petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner; 6. Petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency; 5. Petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner; 6. Petitioner shall attend the Court regularly; 7. Petitioner shall not indulge in similar offences; 8. Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Bengaluru District, without prior permission. If any of the above conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of this bail order. Ordered accordingly.