KABC010083132024 IN THE COURT OF LXVI ADDL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-67) PRESENT SHRI. HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R , B.A.L., L.L.B., LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, I/C LXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Dated this the 4 th day of April, 2024 Crl.Misc.No.2945/2024 PETITIONER:- SURESH JOSHI, s/o Narendra Joshi, Aged about 47 years, R/at Maruthi Excel Home Apartment, Virupakshipura, Kodigehalli, Bengaluru. Native of.- Lammishivanagar, Palike-1, Mothipura Thana, Kailali District, Nepal. [Accused No.3] (By Sri. MND., Advocate) V/s. RESPONDENT:- STATE OF KARNATAKA, By Kodigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru. (Rep. by Public Prosecutor) 2 Crl.Misc.No.2945/2024 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.3 on bail in Crime No.81/2024 registered by the respondent Kodigehalli police for the offence punishable under Sections 381, 328, 120B of IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows.-

The complainant N.Gopalaiah has lodged the complaint alleging that the complainant and his daughter-in-law are residing in the said house. On 27.02.2024 the complainant had been to Cochin, at that time the driver dropped the complainant to Airport and returned to home. On 28.02.2024 the complainant's daughter-in-law was having difficult to speak, as such the driver took her to bedroom and later at about 8.00 pm., the driver had come to the Airport to pick him and at about 9.00 pm., the complainant returned to the house along with the driver and he has stated that the daughter-in-law is in drunken state, the complainant got suspicion and he managed to open his room with a master keys and then hospitalized his daughter-in-law and on inspection he found his wardrobe drawer was broken open and 2 gold rings and cash were missing. As such the complainant suspected his two servants who might have administered drug to his daughter-in-law for the sake of committing theft. Alleging the same the complainant has lodged the complaint. The police on receipt of the said complaint have registered a case in Crime No.81/2024 against the unknown persons for the offences punishable under Sections 381, 328, 120B of IPC. The police during the course of investigation have arrested the present accused and produced before the VII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and he has been remanded to judicial custody. 3 Crl.Misc.No.2945/2024

3. The petitioner 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 he is not directly or indirectly involved in the alleged commission of offence. The petitioner submits that he is not aware of the alleged offences and for no fault of him, the police have arrested due to foul game played by the accused No.1 and 2. The petitioner submits that he hails from respectable family and has no bad antecedents and no actual recovery has been made from the possession of the present petitioner, but the police in order to implicate the petitioner has falsely shown the recovery from the possession of the petitioner just to implicate him in the said case. The said offences is not exclusively punishable either with death or imprisonment for life and also 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 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 the petitioner is grievous in nature and also has further contended that the accused persons have administered drug to the complainant's daughter-in-law and committed theft of the house. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that the complaint averments prima facie shows that the petitioner is involved in the alleged commission of offence. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that the offences alleged against the petitioner are grievous in nature and the case is still under the stage of investigation and also has further contended that the accused person is from Nepal as such if he is released on bail, there is every chances of petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroy the 4 Crl.Misc.No.2945/2024 evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.

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

consideration.-

1. Whether the petitioner/ accused No.3 has made out sufficient ground to allow the petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C?

2. What order?

6. My answer to the above points are.-

Point No.1:– In the Affirmative 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 petitioner is not directly or indirectly involved in the alleged commission of offence. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the petitioner is not aware of the alleged offences and for no fault of him, the police have arrested due to foul game played by the accused No.1 and 2. The petitioner counsel has further contended that the petitioner hails from respectable family and has no bad antecedents and no actual recovery has been made from the possession of the present petitioner, but the police in order to implicate the petitioner has falsely shown the recovery from the possession of the petitioner just to implicate him in the said case. The said offences is not exclusively punishable either with death or imprisonment for life and also 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 investigation. Hence, prays to allow the bail petition. 5 Crl.Misc.No.2945/2024

8. The learned Public Prosecutor has addressed arguments

contending that the offence alleged against the petitioner is grievous in nature and also has further contended that the accused persons have administered drug to the complainant's daughter-in-law and committed theft of the house. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that the complaint averments prima facie shows that the petitioner is involved in the alleged commission of offence. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that the offences alleged against the petitioner are grievous in nature and the case is still under the stage of investigation and also has further contended that the accused person is from Nepal as such if he is released on bail, there is every chances of petitioner threatening the prosecution 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 the complaint alleging that the complainant and his daughter-in-law are residing in the said house. On 27.02.2024 the complainant had been to Cochin, at that time the driver dropped the complainant to Airport and returned to home. On 28.02.2024 the complainant's daughter-in-law was having difficult to speak, as such the driver took her to bedroom and later at about 8.00 pm., the driver had come to the Airport to pick him and at about 9.00 pm., the complainant returned to the house along with the driver and he has stated that the daughter-in-law is in drunken state, the complainant got suspicion and he managed to open his room with a master keys and then hospitalized his daughter-in-law and on inspection he found his wardrobe drawer was broken open and 2 gold rings and cash were missing. As such the complainant suspected his two servants who might have administered drug to his daughter-in-law for the sake of 6 Crl.Misc.No.2945/2024 committing theft. Alleging the same the complainant has lodged the complaint. The police on receipt of the said complaint have registered a case in Crime No.81/2024 against the unknown persons for the offences punishable under Sections 381, 328, 120B of IPC. The petitioner has contended that he is innocent of the alleged offences and the offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 381, 328, 120B of IPC and the said offences are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death. In the present case, the case is still under the stage of investigation and the offences alleged are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death. The petitioner has contended that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody and also there is no recovery from the present accused and also 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 investigation and he is in judicial custody from the date of arrest on 08.03.2024 till today. On perusal of the records it is noticed that the case is still under the stage of investigation and the police having taken the said accused for police custody for the purpose of investigation, has been produced and remanded to judicial custody dated 22.03.2024 as such it shows that the present petitioner is not required for further investigation. Though the offences alleged against the petitioner are grievous in nature. 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 investigation. The apprehension of the prosecution is that if the bail petition of the petitioner is allowed there is every chances of petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroying the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. The said apprehension of the prosecution can be satisfied by imposing stringent conditions. Admittedly, the petitioner is 7 Crl.Misc.No.2945/2024 resident of the address shown in the cause title. If at all during the course of trial, the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the petitioner, he can be dealt with in accordance with law. Considering all these facts, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be enlarged on bail by imposing certain conditions, which would meet the apprehension of prosecution. Accordingly, I answer the point No.1 in the 'Affirmative'.

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.3 under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed. The petitioner / accused No.3 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.81/2024 registered by the Kodigehalli police for the offence punishable under Sections 381, 328, 120B of IPC, on execution of personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum subject to the following CONDITIONS:-

1. The petitioner shall appear before the court on all the dates of hearing.

2. The petitioner shall appear before the I.O whenever he is called upon for the purpose of further investigation.

3. The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal activities. 8 Crl.Misc.No.2945/2024

4. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not threaten, induce allure the prosecution witnesses in whatsoever manner.

5. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission of the court.

6. The petitioner to produce permanent address proof document.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this 4th day of April, 2024) (HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R) LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, I/C LXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.