KABC010017192023
IN THE COURT OF THE LXII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY [CCH.63]
Dated: This the 30 th day of January, 2023
Present: Sri. A. EARANNA, M.Com., LL.M.,
LXII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
Petitioner
Sri. Yogesh @ Abhi @ Chapathi
S/o Late. Chandrashekar
Aged about 23 years,
R/at 8th Cross, Near VV Bakery,
Ittamadagu Main Road,
Ittamadagdu,
Bengaluru.
By Sharanesh S. V.,, Advocate.
Vs.

Respondent:
State by C.K. Achukattu Police station
Bengaluru
Rep. by Public Prosecutor.

2
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
OR D E R
The petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1
under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for an order of anticipatory bail.
2. On the strength of complainant the Bagalagunte
police have registered the case in Crime No. 92/2022 for the
offence punishable under Section 397 r/w 34 of I.P.C., The
respondent police after completion of investigation filed the
charge sheet for the offence punishable U/s 397 r/w 34 of
I.P.C. pending on the file of 2th ACMM, Bengaluru.
3. In the bail petition it is contended that the petitioner
is innocent and he has not committed the alleged offences.
The respondent police have falsely implicated the petitioner in
the case on hand on the basis of false complaint. The
petitioner is the permanent resident of his address shown in
the cause title of the petition. The petitioner is having deep
root in the society. The respondent police are making hectic
efforts to arrest the petitioner and hence, on genuine
apprehension of his imminent arrest by the respondent Police,
the petitioner has been constrained to file this petition for
anticipatory bail.

The petitioner is ready to abide by any
conditions that may be imposed by the Court and he is ready
to furnish surety to ensure his regular attendance before the
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
3
concerned Court. Inter alia, on these grounds, the petitioner
pray for allowing of the bail petition.
4. Whereas, the learned Public Prosecutor filed objection
along
with
counter
of
I.O.

and
other
documents,
by
contending that the charge sheet material reveals that the
petitioner has committed the offences punishable under
Section 397 r/w 34 of I.P.C. At this stage, the petitioner is
granted with anticipatory bail, the petitioner may threaten the
prosecution witnesses and he may destroy the prosecution
evidence or he may commit the similar kind of offences and
the possibility of petitioner fleeing away from justice cannot be
ruled out. Inter alia, on these grounds, the learned Public
Prosecutor prays for dismissing of the bail petition.
5. Heard both sides. Perused the record.
6. Following points arise for consideration of this Court:
1.

Whether the petitioner has made out
ground to enlarge him on anticipatory bail
under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?

2.

What Order?

7. My findings on the above Points are as follows:
Point No.1 – In the Affirmative
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
4
Point No.2
– As per Final Order, for the
following:
R E A S ON S
8. Point No.1: On going through the prosecution
papers it reveals that, the complainant Smt. Shobha after
completion of her work on 17/04/2022 she was boarded the
bus in Chamarajapet and getdown in Near Srinivasnagar at
about 7.25 p.m to 7.30 p.m. while she was proceeding near
Kattriguppe Khadhi Commission layout, 4 th Main road then
two unknown persons came in motorcycle and stopped the
motorcycle in front of her. Then pillion rider of the motorcycle
taken the knife and threatened the complainant. Due to
threat the pillion rider of the motorcycle has snatched the
mangalasutra weighing of 32 grams and after snatching then
they went in the motor cycle. Thereafter, the complainant has
lodged the complaint. Based on the complaint the respondent
police have registered the case in Crime No. 92/2022 for the
offences punishable U/s. 397 of IPC. As per the records that
the present petitioner was arrested by the respondent police.
Then he was given to the police custody. After police custody
he was remanded to the judicial custody. As per the records
the present petitioner produced under body warrant, it seems
that he was released from the bail. Thereafter, the respondent
police
have
filed
the
chargesheet
against
the
present
5
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
petitioner for an offences punishable U/s. 397 r/w 34 of
I.P.C.
9. On perusal of the records it reveals that the
respondent police have seized the motorcycle bearing No. KA02-EQ-1201. As per the awareness of the complaint, the
complainant has not seen the accused persons as it was dark
evening time and the accused persons came in the said
motorcycle and snatched the mangalasutra. After arrest of
the accused persons, on enquiry the accused persons have
sold the said mangalasutra for Rs. 80,000/- and same seems
to be seized by the respondent police. The respondent police
have filed the chargesheet against the accused persons then
there is no necessity for interrogation and there is no
necessity to recover any materials from the present petitioner.
The respondent police have already filed the chargesheet.
When such being the case, there is no threat against the
prosecution witness. However, the prosecution apprehends is
that the petitioner may abscond from the case and may
threaten the prosecution witnesses shall be meeted out by
imposing suitable condition. Alleged offence is not punishable
with life imprisonment or death sentence by considering the
bail application this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner
is entitled for bail.
10. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner
has not committed any offence as alleged by the complainant
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
6
police.

Alleged
offence
is
not
punishable
with
life
imprisonment or death sentence. The respondent police after
completion of investigation have already filed the charge
sheet. The accused is ready to abide by the conditions
imposed by the Court. Therefore he prays to allow the bail
application. Learned Public Prosecutor have argued that if the
accused released on bail then there is chances of abscond
and there is chances of destroy the documents and threaten
the prosecution witnesses. Therefore she prays to reject the
bail application.

11. On perusal of materials on record, it shows that the
alleged offence is non bailable in nature and not punishable
with death sentence or imprisonment for life. Since the
respondent police after completion of investigation, have
already filed the charge sheet and also recovered the material
objects. Further the petitioner is not required for further
investigation or interrogation.

While passing the bail order
the Court has to see previous bad antecedents of the accused.

12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Central
Bureau of investigation Vs. V.Vijay Sai Reddy 2013 (7)
SCALE 15 was pleased to express that; “28. While granting
bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation,
the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the
7
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the
accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused,
reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused
at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being
tampered with, the larger interests of the public/ state and
other similar consideration. It has also to be kept in mind
that for the purpose of granting bail, the legislature has used
the words ‘reasonable grounds for believing” instead of “the
evidence” which means the court dealing with the grant of
bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case
against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to
produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is
not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing
the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

13. Further it is settled law by the catena of decisions
that “the accused is to be presumed as innocent until
guilt is proved by the prosecution in full-fledged trial by
discharging its burden of proof. Until then, it is not just
and proper to put the accused in jail as a measurement
of punishment in the pre-trail stage.” It is settled position
of law by the Catena of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court
and various High Courts that “securing the presence of the
accused for trial and protection of witnesses form
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
8
tampering are the main considerations at the stage of
granting bail.”
14. The petitioner claims to be the permanent resident
of address shown in the cause title of the bail petition. It is
urged that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish surety
to the satisfaction of this Court to ensure their attendance
before the I.O and the Court and he is also ready to abide by
any conditions imposed by Court. As such, possibility of the
abscondance of petitioner is too remote.
15. The apprehension and interest of the prosecution
that
the
witnesses,
petitioner
flee
may
away
tamper
from
justice
with
can
the
be
prosecution
taken
and
safeguarded by imposing some suitable conditions. Hence by
considering all these aspects, I am of the opinion that the
petitioner is entitled for bail and accordingly, I answer the
above Point No.1 in the Affirmative.
16. Point No.2: In view of my findings on Point No.1, I
proceed to pass the following:
OR D E R
The anticipatory bail petition filed by the
petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C is
hereby allowed.

9
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
The respondent police are hereby directed
to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail
in the event of his arrest in Crime No.
92/2022 of respondent Police Station for the
offence punishable under Section 397 r/w 34
of I.P.C., pending on the file of 2th ACMM,
Bengaluru on execution of his personal bond
for Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like
sum on the following conditions:
1.That the petitioner shall appear before
the I.O. within 30 days from the date of this
order and shall co-operate in the matter of
investigation or whenever called by the I.O.
2. That the petitioner shall not hold any
threat to the complainant and shall not
tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses
directly or indirectly.
3. That the petitioner shall furnish his
residential address proof and that of her
surety.
4. That the petitioner shall not indulge in
similar type of offences in future.
5. That the petitioner shall appear before
the trial court regularly without fail on receipt
of the summons.

10
Crl.Misc.No. 543/2023
6. That if the petitioner fails to obey any
of the above said conditions, then this bail
order automatically stands canceled.
(Dictated to the Typist, directly on computer, typed by her,
revised and corrected by me and then pronounced in the open
court on this the 30 th day of January 2023)
(A. EARANNA)
LXII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge,
(CCH-63), Bengaluru.