KABC010081512024 IN THE COURT OF LXV ADDL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-66) PRESENT SHRI. HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R , B.A.L., L.L.B., LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Dated this the 3 rd day of April, 2024 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024 PETITIONER/S:- MADAN. T.P, s/o Raju, Aged about 20 years, R/at No.277, 8th Cross, Ravindranagar Gutte, T.Dasarahalli, Bengaluru. (Accused No.7) (By Sri. KHM., Advocate) V/s. RESPONDENT:- STATE OF KARNATAKA, By RMC Yard Police Station, Bengaluru. (Rep. by Public Prosecutor) ORDER ON PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner/ accused No.7 on bail in Crime No.218/2023 (CC.No.4359/2024) registered by respondent RMC Yard police for the 2 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024 offence punishable under Sections 143, 395, 396 r/w Section 149 of IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case.-

The complainant has lodged the complaint alleging that he is working in Tirupathi Bhimas Hotel and doing house keeping work and he is staying in the said hotel along with his relative Vijay and they are from Nepal and his relatives Anil Bora, Bishal and Vijay have came to Bengaluru in searching of job and they are working in hotels and security agency and the complainant and the injured Anil Bora are working in Glass shop in Srirampura, Bengaluru. On 12.11.2023 in the night the complainant along with his relatives came near the ATM at 1st gate of RMC Yard to meet their another relative Shyam Bora who is working as security guard in the said ATM, on the occasion of Diwali festival on that night itself all of them together finished their dinner and after finishing their dinner all of them on 13.11.2023 at about 3.00 am., early in the morning are waiting near the Kashi Vishwanatha Temple near APMC Yard gate No.1, at this juncture a TATA Ace goods vehicle bearing No.KA-02/AA-3526 came near them and from the said vehicle 5 to 6 unknown persons got down from that vehicle with wooden stick and threatened them and they have snatched MI mobile phone from the complainant and INPHINIX mobile phone from Vijay and they approached Anil Bora and they have tried to snatch the mobile phone from him and when he resisted them, one of them has assaulted Anil Bora with stick and snatched Rs.5,200/- from him and went away in the said goods vehicle and on 13.11.2023 at about 8.30 am., the complainant has lodged the complaint and respondent police have registered the case in Crime No.218/2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 397 of IPC and subsequently the injured 3 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024 succumbed to the said injury and the respondent police have added Sections 396, 302 of IPC and during the course of investigation the respondent police have arrested the five persons and the present petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 in the said case and the accused having been produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate, have been remanded to judicial custody.

3. The petitioner is in judicial custody from the date of arrest,

being aggrieved by the same, has preferred this bail petition on the following among other grounds. The petitioner submits that he is innocent of the alleged offences and the name of the petitioner does not figure in the FIR or in the complaint, but the respondent police have falsely implicated the name of the petitioner in the remand application as the later stage of the investigation. The petitioner submits that he is totally stranger to the alleged crime and he was not aware about the same, he never involved in the above case and has not committed any offences either directly or indirectly. The petitioner submits that he is no way concerned to the death of decease as he was not present at the place of incident and held responsible for the same and due to assault made by some unknown persons the deceased sustained head injuries and thereafter died in the hospital. The petitioner submits that the alleged incident occurred in the public place at that time the complainant would have shouted, on hearing his screaming the vehicle riders or others would have intervened and caught hold those unknown persons, but no incident occurred in the presence of the petitioner. The petitioner submits that the alleged incident occurred on 12/13.11.2023 and the respondent police have arrested the petitioner on 28.11.2023 after 15 days and produced him before the IX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and the trial court remanded him to judicial custody, but the respondent police have not sought the petitioner to 4 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024 their police custody for further investigation, this shows that the respondent police almost completed the investigation. The petitioner submits that he is permanent resident of Bengaluru and he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this court and also co-operate with the investigation. Hence, prays to allow the bail petition.

4. After service of notice, the learned Public Prosecutor has

appeared and filed objection contending that the offence alleged against petitioners are grievous in nature and also has further contended that the police had earlier registered case in Cr.No.218/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397 of IPC and the injured Anil Bohara was being admitted to the hospital succumbed to the said injury on 22.11.2023 and the respondent police have subsequently included Sections 396, 302 of IPC and the learned Public Prosecutor has further contended that interest he present case investigation has been completed, the charge sheet has been filed against the accused persons. The learned Public Prosecutor has also contented that the charge sheet has been filed against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 396, 143 and 149 IPC by leaving Sections 302 and 397 of IPC. The learned Public Prosecutor has further contended that as per the charge sheet materials there are prima facie materials against the accused persons for having involved in the commission of alleged offences. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that there is digital evidence with respect to the alleged offence and also further contended that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail there is every chances of petitioners threatening the witnesses, destroy the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition. 5 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024

5. Heard the arguments. Now the points that arise for my

consideration.-

1. Whether the petitioner/ accused No.7 has made out sufficient ground to allow the petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C?

2. What order?

6. My answer to the above points are.-

Point No.1:– In the Negative Point No.2:– As per final order for the following

REASONS

7. Point No.1:- The petitioner counsel has addressed the

argument contending that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and the name of the petitioner does not figure in the FIR or in the complaint, but the respondent police have falsely implicated the name of the petitioner in the remand application as the later stage of the investigation. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the petitioner is totally stranger to the alleged crime and he was not aware about the same, he never involved in the above case and has not committed any offences either directly or indirectly the petitioner is no way concerned to the death of decease as he was not present at the place of incident and held responsible for the same and due to assault made by some unknown persons the deceased sustained head injuries and thereafter died in the hospital. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the alleged incident occurred in the public place at that time the complainant would have shouted, on hearing his screaming the vehicle riders or others would have intervened and caught hold those unknown persons, but no incident occurred in the presence of the petitioner. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the alleged incident occurred on 12/13.11.2023 and the respondent police 6 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024 have arrested the petitioner on 28.11.2023 after 15 days and produced him before the IX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and the trial court remanded him to judicial custody, but the respondent police have not sought the petitioner to their police custody for further investigation, this shows that the respondent police almost completed the investigation. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this court and also co-operate with the investigation. Hence, prays to allow the bail petition.

8. The Learned Public Prosecutor has addressed the

arguments contending that the the offence alleged against petitioner are grievous in nature and also has further contended that the police had earlier registered case in Crime No.218/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397 of IPC and the injured Anil Bohara was being admitted to the hospital succumbed to the said injury on 22.11.2023 and the respondent police have subsequently included Sections 396, 302 of IPC and the learned Public Prosecutor has further contended that in the present case investigation has been completed, the charge sheet has been filed against the accused persons. The learned Public Prosecutor has also contented that the charge sheet has been filed against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 396, 143 and 149 IPC by leaving Sections 302 and 397 of IPC. The learned Public Prosecutor has further contended that as per the charge sheet materials there are prima facie materials against the accused persons for having involved in the commission of alleged offences. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that there is digital evidence with respect to the alleged offence and also further contended that if the petitioner is enlarged on 7 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024 bail there is every chances of petitioner threatening the witnesses, destroy the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.

9. On perusal of the records it is noticed that the complainant

has lodged complaint alleging that the complainant and his relative Vijay are working in Tirupathi Bhimas Hotel as house keepers and they are staying in the said hotel. The relatives of the complainant Anil Bora, Bishal and Vijay had came to Bengaluru in searching of job and they were working in hotels and security agency and the complainant and the injured Anil Bora was working in Glass shop in Srirampura, Bengaluru. On 12.11.2023 in the night the complainant along with his relatives came near the ATM at 1st gate of RMC Yard to meet their another relative Shyam Bora who is working as security guard in the said ATM, on the occasion of Diwali festival on that night itself all of them together finished their dinner and after finishing their dinner all of them on 13.11.2023 at about 3.00 am., early in the morning are waiting near the Kashi Vishwanatha Temple near APMC Yard gate No.1, at this juncture a TATA Ace goods vehicle bearing No.KA-02/AA-3526 came near them and from the said vehicle 5 to 6 unknown persons got down from that vehicle with wooden stick and threatened them and they have snatched MI mobile phone from the complainant and INPHINIX mobile phone from Vijay and they approached Anil Bora and they have tried to snatch the mobile phone from him and when he resisted them, one of them has assaulted Anil Bora with stick and snatched Rs.5,200/- from him and went away in the said goods vehicle. The complainant on 13.11.2023 at about 8.30 am., has lodged the complaint against the accused persons and the police on receipt of the said complaint have registered the case in Crime No.218/2023 for the offence punishable 8 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024 under Sections 395, 397 of IPC. The injured Anil Bora was admitted to the hospital as such the respondent police have added Sections 396, 302 of IPC. During the course of investigation the police have arrested the five persons and they have been remanded to judicial custody. On perusal of the records it is noticed that the offences alleged against the petitioner are grievous in nature and the complaint averments prima facie shows that the petitioner is involved in the alleged offences as the complaint averments reveal that some unknown persons came in a TATA Ace goods vehicle bearing No.KA-02/AA-3526 and they have snatched the mobile phones of complainant and his friend and also they tried to snatch the mobile phone from him as he has resisted them and they have assaulted him on his head and also snatched Rs.5,200/- and ran away from the spot. The allegations made in the complaint against the accused person is grievous and the injured having succumbed to the said injury. The respondent police during the course of investigation had invoked Sections 396 and 302 of IPC. The respondent police after completing the investigation have filed charge sheet against accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 395, 396, 149 IPC. The respondent police have left Sections 302 and 397 of IPC in the charge sheet. On perusal of the charge sheet materials it prima facie disclose that the accused persons are involved in the alleged commission of offence. The petitioner has contended that he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this Court and also co-operate with the trial and also have contended that there is no specific overt act against the present petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that the offence alleged against the petitioner is grievous in nature and also the assault made by the accused persons is caused the death of the deceased Anil Bohara and the said Anil Bohara during the course of treatment has succumbed to 9 Crl.Misc.No.2903/2024 the said injury. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that there is digital evidence with respect to the alleged commission of the offence. In the present case, though the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, the charge sheet material prima facie shows that the accused persons are involved in he commission of alleged offences and due to the alleged act of the accused persons the injured has succumbed to the said injury. The offences alleged against the petitioner is grievous and are punishable with imprisonment for life or death. At this stage, if the bail petition of the petitioner is allowed there is every chances of the petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroy the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. As such the petitioner has not made out sufficient grounds to allow the bail petition. Accordingly, I answer the point No.1 in the ''Negative'.

10. Point No.2:- In view of the findings given on point No.1, I

proceed to pass the following.-

ORDER

The petition filed by the petitioner/ accused No.7 under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is dismissed. (Directly dictated to the stenographer online computer, typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this 3rd day of April, 2024) (HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R) LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.