KABC010089292024
IN THE COURT OF THE LII ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-53)
Dated this the 20th day of April, 2024
PRESENT
Sri.B.G.Pramoda, B.A.L., LL.B.,
LII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bangalore.
Crl.Misc.No.3166/2024
petitioner:
Chethan K.
S/o Krishnamurthy,
Aged about 26 years,
R/at No.22, 8th Main,
Agrahara Dasarahallil,
Bengaluru Ц 560079.
(Accused No.2 in judicial custody)
(By Sri.Manohara, Advocate)
-V/S-
Respondent :
State of Karnataka
By Magadi Road police station,
Bengaluru.
(Represented
Prosecutor)
by
learned
Public
2
Crl.Misc.No.3166/2024
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner u/Sec.438 of
Cr.P.C., praying to grant anticipatory bail to him in the even of
his arrest in (Cr.No.34/2020) CC.No.6743/2020 for the
offences punishable u/Sec.307, 143, 146, 148 r/w Sec.149 of
IPC, on the file of 3rd ACMM, Bengaluru.
2. It is stated in the petition that the respondent police
have filed Cr.No.34/2020 against petitioner and others
alleging the offences punishable u/Sec.307, 143, 146, 148
r/w Sec.149 of IPC. The respondent police, after investigation
of the case have filed charge sheet before learned 3rd ACMM,
Bengaluru and on the basis of said charge sheet, the learned
magistrate has registered CC.No.6743/2020 against the
petitioner and others. The petitioner is shown as accused
No.2 in the charge sheet. It is further stated in the petition
that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any
offence as alleged against him. The petitioner is the
permanent resident of address mentioned in the cause title,
having deep roots in the society and has no bad
antecedents. There is no specific overt act is attributed
against the petitioner. The petitioner was granted bail in
Crl.Misc.No.3375/2020 and regularly appearing before the
court since his parents were not feeling well and the accused
taken them to Kerala for treatment. As such, he could not be
present before the court and was unable to contact his
Crl.Misc.No.3166/2024
3
advocate. The petitioner is ready to abide by any terms and
conditions that may be imposed by the court for his
enlargement on bail. The petitioner is ready and willing to
offer surety to the satisfaction of the court. Hence, the
petitioner has prayed to allow the petition.
3.

The learned Public Prosecutor has filed the
objection to the petition by opposing the grant of bail to the
petitioner on the ground that the offences alleged against the
petitioner are heinous and against to the society. It is further
stated in the objection that the petitioner was already granted
bail in Crl.Misc.No.3375/20 and he has not complied the bail
condition. Proclamation warrant was also issued against the
petitioner for not appearing before the court. If the petitioner
is enlarged on bail, he will again abscond and delay the trial
of the case and he will commit similar offences in future. He
will threaten the informant and other prosecution witnesses.
Hence, the Learned Public Prosecutor has prayed to reject
the petition filed by the petitioner.
4.

Heard
the
arguments
of
Learned
Public
Prosecutor and Learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused
the petition, objection and other materials on record.

5. Having done so, the following points will arise for
my consideration:
Crl.Misc.No.3166/2024
4
(1) Whether the petitioner has made out
grounds for granting anticipatory bail
u/s.438 of Cr.P.C.,?
(2) What order?
6.

My findings on the above points are as under:
(1) Point No.1
..

In the Negative
(2) Point No.2
..

As per final order
for the following:
REASONS
7.

Point No.1:- The respondent police have
registered filed charge sheet before the trial court against the
present petitioner and others alleging offence punishable
u/Sec.307, 143, 146, 148 r/w Sec.149 of IPC. On the basis of
said charge sheet, the learned 3rd ACMM, Bengaluru,
magistrate has registered CC.No.6743/2020 against the
petitioner and others. The petitioner is shown as accused
No.2 in the charge sheet. The petitioner has produced the
certified copy of FIR, charge sheet, order sheet in
Cr.No.34/2020 and other documents.
8.

It is to be noted here that the petitioner was
arrested by the respondent police during crime stage and he
was taken to judicial custody. As such, the petitioner has filed
Crl.Misc.No.3375/2020 praying to enlarge him on bail. The
said petition was came to be allowed and bail was granted to
the petitioner. As such, the petitioner was released on bail by
Crl.Misc.No.3166/2024
5
the trial court by obtaining surety. Thereafter the petitioner
did not appear before the trial court. As such, warrant was
issued against him. Warrant was also not executed. As such,
proclamation
was issued
by
the trial
court.

Further
attachment warrant of properties of the petitioner was also
issued by the trial court u/Sec.82 and 83 of Cr.P.C.
9.

Now the petitioner has filed the present petition
praying to grant anticipatory bail. The learned PP. has
argued that the present petition is not maintainable.
Anticipatory bail u/Sec.438 of Cr.P.C. can be granted in case
apprehension of arrest by the police on the allegation of
commission
of non-bailable
offence.

The protection
u/Sec.438 of Cr.P.C. is not available to the accused after his
arrest. The petitioner was already arrested during crime
stage and he was already enlarged on regular bail.

The
petitioner without appearing before the trial court and without
seeking necessary order from the trial court for recall of
warrant issued against him has filed the present petition
before this court seeking anticipatory bail. The petitioner has
violated the bail condition. Proclamation and attachment
warrant of property of accused was also issued by the trial
court. It seems that the petitioner is of absconding nature. As
such, the present petition filed by the petitioner u/Sec.438 of
Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Hence, the discretion of this
court to grant anticipatory bail u/Sec.438 of N.I.Act cannot be
6
Crl.Misc.No.3166/2024
exercised in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner has to
surrender before the trial court and he has to seek proper
order from the said court. As such, I am of the opinion that
the petition filed by the petitioner is deserves to be
dismissed. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the
Negative.
10.

Point No.2:- In view of my findings on point
No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioner u/s.438 of
Cr.P.C., is hereby dismissed.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, directly on computer, corrected
and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20 th day
of April, 2024).

(B.G.Pramoda)
LII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.

7
Crl.Misc.No.3166/2024