Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 677 (KAR)

Suresha v. State of Karnataka

2023-05-18

M.G.UMA

body2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER 1. The petitioners - accused Nos.2 to 4 are before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.96/2022 of Arakere Police Station, Mandya District, pending on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and J.M.F.C Court, Srirangapatna, registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 498A, 114, 302, 149 of IPC, on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Sri. Mahendra on 7/7/2022, 2. Heard Sri. Nagendra B., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. H.S.Shankar, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.2 to 4. They are innocent and law abiding citizens. They have not committed any offence as alleged. They have been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. Learned counsel further submitted that accused No.2 is the brother and accused No.3 is the sister of accused No.1. Accused No.4 is the husband of accused No.3 They have not committed any offences alleged. Since they were related to accused No.1, they are falsely implicated in the matter. The petitioners are ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating Officer. There is reasonable apprehension of they being arrested. Hence, they are before this Court. They are the permanent resident of the addresses mentioned in the cause-title to the petition and are ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition in the interest of justice. 4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioners for having committed the offences. They actively instigated accused No.1 to commit the offence. Investigation is still under progress. The petitioners are absconding since from the date of registration of the case. If they are granted anticipatory bail, they may never turn up before the Investigating Officer and they may abscond or may commit similar offences, threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. If they are granted anticipatory bail, they may never turn up before the Investigating Officer and they may abscond or may commit similar offences, threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: "Whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of anticipatory bail under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C.?" My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following: R E A S O N S 6. The allegations made against the accused are of serious nature. The informant lodged the first information making specific allegations. However, he stated that accused Nos.2 to 4, who are the relatives of accused No.1 have instigated accused No.1 to commit the offence. Admittedly, accused No.1 is already enlarged on bail. It is not the case of the prosecution that petitioners are required for further investigation. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the apprehensions expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioners may abscond or may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses. 7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.96/2022 of Arakere Police Station, Mandya District. The petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and on their appearance, the Investigating Officer shall enlarge them on bail subject to the following conditions:- a. The petitioners shall furnish the bond in a sum of Rs.2, 00, 000.00 (Rupees Two Lakhs only) each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer; b. The petitioners shall not commit similar offences; c. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer or the court as and when required; and d. The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. On furnishing the sureties by the petitioners, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to verify the correctness of the addresses and authenticity of the documents furnished by them. On furnishing the sureties by the petitioners, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to verify the correctness of the addresses and authenticity of the documents furnished by them. On satisfaction of the said documents, he may proceed to accept the sureties within a reasonable time.