KABC010158852022
IN THE COURT OF THE LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH64) AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 30th day of June 2022
: PRESENT :
Sri.A.V.Patil, B.Com., LL.B.,
LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY.
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS NO.5913/2022
PETITIONER
:
Sabapathi Raji
S/o Raji,
Aged about 44 years,
Residing at Building No.15(1),
S.Mottur, Samalpatti, Mottur,
Tamilnadu – 635 306.
(By Sri.Lokesh.A, Advocate)
Vs
RESPONDENT :
State by Malleshwaram Police
Station, Bengaluru.
(By Public Prosecutor)
2
Crl.Misc.5913/2022
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition u/s 439 of Cr.P.C.,
for grant of bail in Cr.No.28/2022 registered for the offence
punishable u/s 397 of IPC.
2.
It is stated in the bail application that he is a law abiding
and peace loving citizen and permanent resident of the
address shown in the cause title. The respondent/Police have
taken the advantage of language barrier of the petitioner and
also further took the advantage that he belongs to other state,
has filed this present false case against him. The name of the
petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR. Since 25 years the
petitioner is working as a coconut tree climber and working
for daily wages. There are number of CCTV cameras near the
house of the complainant, but the respondent/Police without
considering the CCTV footages have fitted in this case. The
incident took place on 07.03.2022 but the complaint has been
filed on 27.03.2022. The parents and family members of the
petitioner are residing in Tamilnadu and are depending on the
petitioner for their livelihood. He is the judicial custody from
28.03.2022. The offences alleged are not punishable with
death or imprisonment for life. The petitioner is ready to abide
by the conditions. Hence, prayed to grant bail.
3
3.
Crl.Misc.5913/2022
The learned P.P. has opposed the bail application by
filing the objections statement. According to him IO after due
investigation found that petitioner has committed the offences
and hence, filed the charge sheet against him. Filing of charge
sheet itself shows that petitioner has committed the offence
alleged in the charge sheet. Among other grounds prayed to
dismiss the bail application filed by the petitioner.
4.
Heard the arguments from learned Counsel for petitioner
and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the materials placed
on record.
5.
The points that arise for my consideration are:
1. Whether the petitioners are entitled for bail as
prayed in the application filed under Sec.439 of
Cr.P.C.?
2. What order?
6.
My answer to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1: in the negative
Point No.2: As per final order for the following;
REASONS
7.
Point No.1: According to the prosecution on 0703
2022, when the CW2 was in her home around 1 p.m. to 2
p.m., accused forcibly entered the house assaulted on the vital
4
Crl.Misc.5913/2022
part of CW2 i.e., neck with deadly weapon and snatched the
gold chain weighing around 50 grams worn by her in the neck.
After arrest of petitioner he gave confession statement and on
the basis of said statement the gold chain of CW2 was
recovered. Hence, Charge sheet is filed against the petitioner
for the offences punishable under Sec.397 of IPC.
8.
As per the prosecution case, the petitioner being the
resident of Tamilnadu on 07.03.2022 between 01.00 to 02.00
p.m., forcibly entered into the house of CW2 by assaulting on
her neck her with the help of chopper and taken away her
about 50 gram gold chain. Subsequently, the alleged golden
chain came to be seized on the voluntary statement given by
the petitioner.
9.
The Hon’ble Apex Court of India in Cri. Appeal
No.1279/2021 (Bhoopendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan &
Another) noted well settled principles to be considered while
considering the bail application. For the sake of convenience
the relevant portion is extracted and reproduced here under:
i)
Whether there is any prima facie or reasonable
ground to believe that the accused had committed
the offence.
ii)
nature and gravity of the accusation.
iii) severity of the punishment in the event of
conviction.
5
iv)
Crl.Misc.5913/2022
danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if
released on bail.
v) character, behaviour, means, position & standing
of the accused;
vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated;
vii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by
grant of bail.
10.
In another judgment the Hon’ble Apex Court of India
Cri. Appeal No.1202/2021 (Prashant Singh Rajput Vs. The State
of Madhya Pradesh and Another) has observed that while
considering the application for bail the Court has to consider
the nature of offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of
his influencing the course of investigation or tamper with the
evidence, likelihood of fleeing from justice.
11.
Keeping in mind the settled principles to be considered
while deciding the bail application in the above judgments let
me consider the present facts of the case.
12.
In this case, the complaint was filed by the complainant
against
the
unknown
person.
During
the
course
of
investigation, petitioner was arrested and in pursuance of the
voluntary statement given by the petitioner the stolen property
is seized.
13.
The
Investigating
Officer
after
completion
of
6
Crl.Misc.5913/2022
investigation filed the charge sheet against the petitioner.
From the materials collected by the I.O. it is very clear that the
petitioner has committed the alleged offence u/s 397 of IPC
which is heinous in nature and if proved the punishment
would be rigorous imprisonment for not less than 7 years.
14. It is worth to note that earlier the petitioner had filed the
bail
petition
under
Crl.Mis.No.3385/2022.
The
said
application was dismissed on merits on 06.04.2022. The
petitioner has not at all whispered about the filing of the said
petition and by suppressing the said fact, he has filed the
present application.
Except filing of the chargesheet,
absolutely there is no changed circumstance in the case.
15.
No doubt liberty is one of the most precious possession
of a citizen. But there is distinction between liberty and
license. The true liberty is always hedged on all sides with
reasonable restrictions to allow fellow citizens also to live and
prosper in society. When there are serious allegations
supported by sufficient material to raise a prima facie case
against a citizen for an offence punishable with imprisonment
for life, bail cannot be granted to such an accused merely on
the concept of liberty.
16.
It is settled principles of law that at the stage of deciding
7
Crl.Misc.5913/2022
a bail petition, this Court cannot hold a mini trial to find out
merits or demerits of the case. If any such mini trial is held, it
would prejudice the rights of the parties one way or other.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of the accusation, severity of punishment,
in the event of conviction, it is not safe to grant bail to the
petitioner. If the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may
tamper the prosecution witnesses, they may abscond and
obstruct the trial and may commit similar type of offences.
Hence, it is not fit case to exercise the discretion in favor of
petitioner. For the fore going reasons, I answer this point in
the negative.
17.
Point No.2: In view of my findings on point No.1, I
proceed to pass the following order;
ORDER
The regular bail petition filed by petitioner
u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.
(Typed by the Judgment Writer on my dictation, the transcript
revised and then pronounced by me in open Court on this the 30th
day of June 2022)
(A.V.PATIL)
LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
8
Crl.Misc.5913/2022
JUDGE (CCH64), BENGALURU CITY.