1
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
IN THE COURT OF THE LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-69)
Dated this the 1 st day of July 2022
:PRESENT:
Sri.Sabappa, B.Com., LLB (Spl.)
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6053/2022
PETITIONERS :
1.

Manjunath. P.K @ Banet,
S/o Krishnappa. P.M,
Aged about 21 years,
R/at No.223, Ambedkar Colony,
Thotada Mane, Panathuru,
Kadubisanahalli, Bengaluru.

2.

Shivaraju, S/o Mahanthesh. M,
Aged about 23 years,
R/at Opp. Post Office,
Panathuru, Kadubisanahalli,
Bengaluru.
Also permanently R/at
Benakanahalli Village,
Shahapura Taluk,
Kalburgi District.

3.

Prasad.K @ Kari,
S/o Keshava Murthy,
Aged about 19 years,
R/at Muninanjappa’s Rent House,
3rd Cross, 1st Main,
Opp. Vandana Tejas Apartment,
2
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
Panathuru, Kadubisanahalli,
Bengaluru.
Also permanently R/at
Santhe Beedi,
Holenarasipura Taluk,
Hassan District.

(By Sri. K.V. Srinivas, Adv.,)
V/s
RESPONDENT
:
State by;
Begur Police Station, Bengaluru.

(Represented by Public Prosecutor)
ORDER ON BAIL PETITION U/SEC.439 OF CR.P.C.
This petition is filed by the petitioners under Sec.439 of
Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail in connection with Cr.No.158/2022
registered by the Begur Police, for the offences punishable under
Secs.399, 402 of IPC and Sec.25 of Arms Act.
2.

The brief facts of the petitioners’ case is that, the
respondent police have registered case against the petitioners and
other accused persons for the offences punishable U/Secs.399, 402
of IPC and Sec.25 of Arms Act, based on the complaint filed by Sri.
Guruswamy Hiremath, P.S.I, alleging that, on 15.06.2022 in the
early morning at about 00.05 hours when he was on patrolling duty
with the limits of his police station, he received credible information
that in a vacant space, near GIBS College, Mylasandra Road,
3
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
Begur, Bangalore, 4-5 persons alleged to have been assembled
unlawfully and equipped with deadly weapons and planning to
attack and loot the public who were coming on the same road.
Upon the said information the complainant along with his staff and
panchas alleged to have been to the spot and found the accused
persons and after observing their activities and hearing their
discussion raided the spot and apprehended the accused persons
by surrounding them at the alleged spot and caught hold the 5
accused persons. Thereafter, he produced the accused persons
before the SHO. He also seized the weapons from them. The
petitioners who are in judicial custody has filed the present bail
petition.
3. The grounds urged by the petitioners are as under.
They are innocent of the of the alleged offences. They have
got valid and tenable defence. They never committed or involved in
the alleged crime either directly or indirectly. They have been falsely
implicated in the above case. The alleged spot is a busiest place,
such being the case, unlawful assembling with deadly weapons is
an unbelievable story of the complainant. There is no material
evidence establish that the accused persons are planning to attack
and loot the public. The voluntary statements which were so
recorded by the police were drawn by the police as per their whims
and fancy to suit their case. There are no eye witnesses to say that
the accused persons were alleged to have been present at the
alleged spot with deadly weapons. The petitioners hail from
4
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
respectable family. They have no bad antecedents. There is no
specific overt-act attributed by the present petitioners. There is no
prima facie case made out against the petitioners. The alleged
offence is not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for
life. They are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may
be imposed by this Court. They are ready and willing to offer surety
to the satisfaction of the Court. Hence, they pray to allow the
petition.
4.

The learned Public Prosecutor has filed objections to
the bail petition contending that, the grounds stated by the
petitioners are far away from truth. In the objections the learned
Public Prosecutor has narrated the facts as stated in the FIR. It is
further contended that investigation is under progress. Petitioners
have committed heinous offence. If the petitioners are granted bail,
there is every chance that they may abscond, commit similar
offences, tamper the prosecution witnesses and hamper the
evidence. Therefore, the P.P has sought for rejection of bail.
5.

Heard both sides. Perused the materials on record.

6. The points that arise for my consideration are:
1. Whether the petitioners have made out
sufficient grounds for grant of regular bail
U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C as sought for?
2. What order?
7.

My findings to the above points are as follows:
5
Point No.1 :
Point No.2 :
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
In the Affirmative,
As per final order,
for the following;
REASONS
8.

POINT No.1: I have gone through the bail petition,
objection statement and records. It is noticed that the respondent
police registered case in Cr.No.158/2022 against the petitioners
and other accused persons for the offences punishable under
Secs.399, 402 of IPC and Sec.25 of Arms Act. The alleged offences
are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. On perusal
of the complaint, the complainant contended that on 15.06.2022 at
about 5.00 a.m he received information and thereafter he went to
the spot along with his staff and panchas, conducted raid and
arrested the accused persons. Later on, the I.O has arrested the
accused and produced before the Magistrate Court. In order to
ascertain the reality that the petitioners have committed the
offences, it requires trial. Now, the respondent police had conducted
part investigation. At this stage, petitioners are not required for
further interrogation.

9. Moreover, the petitioners are permanent residents of
address mentioned in the cause title. They are having old age
parents. They are the only earning member of their respective
families. If bail is not granted their family members will suffer great
6
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
hardship. At this stage, I would like to mention that bail is a rule and
jail is exception. Thereby, it is not proper to curtile the liberty of the
petitioners put in J.C. But the prosecution contended that, there are
so many cases registered against the petitioners. But the
prosecution is not able to furnish any documents. Thereby, the
contention of the prosecution is over ruled. At this stage, the
petitioners have made out sufficient grounds to enlarge them on
bail. Hence, this Court feels that if some stringent conditions are
imposed while granting bail to the petitioners it will safeguard the
interest of the prosecution. Hence, for the above reasons and
discussion, I answer Point No.1 in the Affirmative.
10.

POINT NO.2:
In view of my findings point No.1, I
proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
Bail petition filed by the petitioners under Sec.
439 of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
Petitioners are ordered to be released on regular
bail in connection with Cr.No.158/2022 on executing
their personal bonds for Rs.1,00,000/- each with two
sureties for the likesum on the following conditions.
1. The petitioners shall not tamper with the
Prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly in any
manner.

7
2. They
shall
regularly
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
appear
before
the
concerned court as and when required.
3. They shall not abscond from the ordinary
residence and they should furnish the address proof to
the concerned police.
4. They shall not indulge in any kind of offence.
5. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court
without prior permission.
6. They shall mark the attendance in the
respondent P.S between 10.00 a.m to 6.00 p.m once in
a month i.e., on 2nd Sunday till filing of the final report.
If any of the above conditions violates the I.O is at
liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
They are ordered to be released on bail if their
custody does not required in any other case.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her,
revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on
this the 01 st of July 2022)
(Sabappa)
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.

8
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
9
Crl.Misc.6053/2022
ORDERS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN
COURT, VIDE SEPARATE ORDER
Bail petition filed by the petitioners under Sec.
439 of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
Petitioners are ordered to be released on regular
bail in connection with Cr.No.158/2022 on executing
their personal bonds for Rs.1,00,000/- each with two
sureties for the likesum on the following conditions.
1. The petitioners shall not tamper with the
Prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly in any
manner.
2. They shall regularly appear
concerned court as and when required.

before
the
3. They shall not abscond from the ordinary
residence and they should furnish the address proof to
the concerned police.
4. They shall not indulge in any kind of offence.
5. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court
without prior permission.
6. They shall mark the attendance in the
respondent P.S between 10.00 a.m to 6.00 p.m once in a
month i.e., on 2nd Sunday till filing of the final report.
If any of the above conditions violates the I.O is at
liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
They are ordered to be released on bail if their
custody does not required in any other case.

LXVIII A.C.C & S.J,
Bengaluru City.

10
Crl.Misc.6053/2022