In a notable judicial order passed on April 6, 2024, the LXV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-66), Shri Hemanth Kumar C.R., B.A.L., LL.B., allowed the regular bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3011/2024. The court enlarged Madhu (Accused No. 1) on regular bail in connection with Crime No. 208/2023 registered by the J.C. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, which was subsequently committed for trial as Sessions Case No. 361/2024. The petitioner was facing prosecution for an offence punishable under Section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Factual Matrix and Allegations

The criminal proceedings originated from a complaint lodged by Naresh, son of late Ashok, residing at Benson Town, J.C. Nagar, Bengaluru.

According to the complainant:

• On December 20, 2023, at approximately 9:30 PM, the complainant (who works as a painter) along with his brother Arun and a friend were celebrating Arun’s birthday on the street.
• The accused, Madhu, who resides in the same locality, approached them and demanded that they clear the road. An argument ensued during which the accused verbally abused the complainant using vulgar language and issued life threats.
• As the complainant walked back toward his residence, Madhu followed him and stabbed him in the abdomen with a knife, causing severe bleeding.
• The complainant’s brother and friend rushed him to Lady Curzon Hospital for emergency medical treatment. Based on the complainant’s statement at the hospital, the J.C. Nagar Police registered Crime No. 208/2023 under Section 307 IPC.
• Following the completion of the police investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted (C.C. No. 4563/2024), and the case was committed to the Sessions Court as S.C. No. 361/2024. The accused remained in judicial custody from the date of his arrest.

The details of the petitioner as per court records are:

• Madhu (Petitioner / Accused No. 1): Aged about 33 years, son of Pillappa, residing at No. 13, MRS Palya, Nandidurga Road, Gangamma Temple, Ganga Bhavani Quarters, Channappa Garden, J.C. Nagar, Bengaluru – 560046.

Arguments Advanced on Behalf of the Petitioner

Appearing on behalf of the applicant, learned advocate Sri L. Dayananda presented several grounds seeking regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.:

• Discharge from Hospital: The defence submitted that the injured complainant suffered simple/non-fatal injuries, was successfully treated, and was discharged from the hospital, demonstrating that the incident lacked the mens rea or premeditation required for Section 307 IPC.
• Completion of Investigation: The police had completed the entire investigation and filed the charge-sheet (C.C. No. 4563/2024 / S.C. No. 361/2024). Consequently, the continued pre-trial detention of the accused was no longer necessary for investigative purposes.
• Sole Breadwinner Status: The petitioner is employed as a driver with the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and serves as the sole earning member supporting his family.
• Permanent Residence and Undertaking: The applicant is a permanent resident of J.C. Nagar, Bengaluru, with fixed abodes, and promised to abide by all court conditions and participate in trial proceedings without fail.

Objections Raised by the Prosecution

The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the grant of regular bail, filing a formal statement of objections:

• Gravity of Offence: The prosecution emphasized that stabbing an individual in the abdomen with a knife constitutes a grave offence under Section 307 IPC, carrying severe statutory penalties.
• Apprehension of Witness Intimidation and Flight: The prosecution expressed concern that if released on bail prior to trial, the accused might intimidate local witnesses, tamper with evidence, or abscond from justice.

Judicial Findings and Detailed Legal Reasoning

The Sessions Court evaluated the complaint, charge-sheet materials, medical treatment records, and rival submissions to determine Point No. 1: whether the petitioner made out sufficient grounds for regular bail.

1. Completion of Investigation and Charge-Sheet Submission

Judge Hemanth Kumar C.R. observed that because the investigating agency had completed all procedural inquiries and formally filed the charge-sheet in court, custodial detention was no longer warranted for investigation purposes.

2. Medical Status and Trial Adjudication

The court noted that the complainant had been discharged from Lady Curzon Hospital and was out of danger. The court emphasized that whether the altercation and knife assault attracted the specific intent required under Section 307 IPC or constituted a lesser offence was a matter to be proven by the prosecution during a full-fledged trial.

3. Balancing Personal Liberty with Trial Safeguards

Holding that the petitioner is a local BBMP driver residing at a verified address in Bengaluru, the court resolved Point No. 1 in the affirmative. The court concluded that prosecution concerns regarding witness interference or non-attendance could be mitigated by imposing strict conditions—including mandatory attendance and prohibition against committing further offences.

It remains a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that an order deciding a bail application is procedural in nature and does not constitute an expression on the ultimate guilt or innocence of the accused, which remains subject to trial.

Final Order and Imposed Conditions

Answering Point No. 1 in the affirmative, LXV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge Shri Hemanth Kumar C.R. allowed the petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and passed the following order:

The petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. The respondent J.C. Nagar Police Station is directed to release the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 208/2023 (S.C. No. 361/2024) registered for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC, on execution of a personal bond for ₹1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum, subject to the following conditions:

1. The petitioner shall appear before the court on all dates of hearing.
2. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called upon for the purpose of further investigation.
3. The petitioner shall not involve himself in any criminal activities.
4. The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence and shall not threaten, induce, or allure 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 shall produce permanent address proof documents.