1
Crl.Misc. No.8362/2023
KABC010229652023
IN THE COURT OF THE LX ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-61)
:PRESENT:
Sri Narashimsa M.V., B.Com., LL.B.,
LX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
Dated this the 7th day of September, 2023.
Crl.Misc.No.8362/2023
PETITIONER:-
Dilip J (A-5)
S/o Jayaram B
Aged about 18 years,
R/at No. 158,
Beeralingeshwara Nilaya
Munigurappa Layout, Amruthahalli
Bangalore
2. Ayush H D (A-6)
S/o Dhananjaya N
Aged about 19 years,
R/at No. 19/1,
SudarshanТs rented house
Munigurappa Layout, 2nd Cross
Behind Vidyamandira Public School
Amruthahalli, Bangalore
(Rep by Sri R – Adv)
-VS-
RESPONDENT:-
The State of Karnataka
By: Kodigehalli Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(By Public Prosecutor)
2
Crl.Misc. No.8362/2023
ORDER
Accused Nos.5 and 6
in Kodigehalli Police station Crime
No.220/2023 have filed this bail application under Sec.439 of
Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 323, 324 r/w 34 of
IPC.
2.

Brief facts of the case as forthcoming from the bail
petition are as under:On 12.8.2023, at about 5 pm, deceased and his wife going in
a car, when they reached near Ambedkar Bhvan, Canara Bank
Layout Government Hospital, at that time 4 to 5 unknown persons
have picked up quarrel without any sufficient cause or reason and
assaulted to Chandrashekar in deadly weapon on his head, face
and sustained blood injury and ran away, public have shifted him to
Medstar Hospital through Ambulance, and further treatment he has
shifted to NIMHANS, thereafter due to failure of treatment injured
died.
On 13.08.2023 respondent police have registered a case
against accused persons for offence punishable u/S 323, 324 r/w 34
of IPC, on the basis of complaint lodged by one Kemparaju, resident
of Muneshwaranagar, present petitioners arrayed as A-5 and 6,
3
Crl.Misc. No.8362/2023
during the course of investigation, police have added Section 307,
323, 324, 504 r/w 34 of IPC, due to failure of treatment, injured
died, respondent police inserted Section 143, 302, 307, 323, 504 r/
w 149 of IPC.

3. The grounds urged in this petition are as under:Petitioner is innocent, respondent police have falsely implicated
petitioners name in the remand application, petitioners have no any
connection with the said crime directly or indirectly,
respondent
police have arrested the petitioners from their house at midnight, if
really they have committed such offence, they could have been
abscond or escape from there, deceased has cheated many of the
persons, hence petitioners got angry and assaulted deceased, but
they have not killed him, it is a cooked up story of complainant,
petitioners are the only sons to taking care of their old aged parents,
who suffering from old aged ailments, they are the only bread
earner of the family, they are ready and willing to offer surety for the
satisfaction of this court, if deems fit to enlarge them on bail. Hence
prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
4.

Leaned Public Prosecutor has filed objections to bail
4
Crl.Misc. No.8362/2023
application. In objections, averments made in the first information
are reiterated. Further, it is stated that accused persons do not
deserve to be enlarged on bail, if they are enlarged on bail, there is
every possibility of they
absconding from the jurisdiction of the
Court, they will threaten the witnesses and destruct the evidence.
Hence, prayed for rejection of bail application.

It is stated that
accused persons have committed heinous offences and
they
should not be granted bail.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner field Aadhar cards of
petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and ID cards, school receipts of petitioners /
A-5 and 6.

6. Heard the learned Advocate for petitioner and the learned
Public Prosecutor.
7.

The point that arises for my consideration is :
1.

8.
following:-
Whether bail application filed under
Sec.439 of Cr.P.C. by accused No.5 & 6
deserves to be allowed?

My finding to the above point is in the Negative, for the
5
Crl.Misc. No.8362/2023
REASONS
9. Point No.1:- Along with this bail application, entire order
sheet of crime No. 220/2023, first information, FIR remand
application are filed.

Perusal
of the order sheet of learned
Magistrate dated 15.8.2023 discloses that
petitioners were
arrested and produced before the learned Magistrate and since
then, they are in custody. Order sheet further reveals that A-1
and A2 were arrested subsequently, initially, case was registered
for the offence punishable u/S 505, 34, 323, 324 of IPC, later on
permission was sought for to include Section 307 of IPC, it was
granted, injured died, thus, permission to conduct investigation
u/S 302 of IPC was sought for permission was granted.
10. Order sheet further reveals that A-1 to A6 were handed
over to police custody for the purpose of investigation till
21.8.2023. Contention of learned counsel for A-5 and 6 is that
since investigation has been completed petitioners have been
falsely implicated in the case, custodial interrogation is not at all
necessary , A-5 and A6 be granted bail, it was contended by
learned counsel that A-5 an 6 are students, if they are detained
in custody, their career will be at stake. It is necessary to note
6
Crl.Misc. No.8362/2023
that A-5 and A6 are students, name of the deceased
is
Chandrashekar and injured is Goutham.
11.

The assault is said
Chandrashekar, in
have
broad day light, A1 is
taken
place on
resident of Uttar
Pradesh and other accused are resident of Bengaluru, offence
alleged against A-5 and A6 is punishable u/S 302 of IPC. One
Goutham, was present at the spot when the assault
was
allegedly caused by A-1 to 6, even said Gutham is injured, mere
completion of period of police custody does not mean that the
investigation has been completed, Goutham is an eyewitness,
if A-5 and 6 are enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of life
threat to Sri Goutham/ injured as well , as he is an eyewitness to
the incident. Conduct of Test Identification Parade may also be
necessary. Considering the nature and gravity of injury, more
particularly place, time at which the offence has committed, this
Court is of the clear opinion that A-5 and A6 are not entitled to be
enlarged on bail, hence, I answer above point in the negative
and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
Bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

7
Crl.Misc. No.8362/2023
by Petitioner/Accused Nos.5 & 6 in Kodigehalli P.
S. crime No. 220/2023 is hereby rejected.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, after corrections,
pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 7th day of September, 2023).

(NARASHIMSA.M.V.)
LX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.