In an order passed on March 30, 2024, the LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-63), Sri A. Earanna, M.Com., LL.M., allowed the regular bail petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2890/2024. The court granted regular bail to Mr. Raja @ Kuttiyan (Accused No. 2), who was re-apprehended on execution of a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) in connection with Crime No. 299/2015 registered by the J.P. Nagar Police Station (referred to in earlier proceedings as Rajgopalanagar Police Station/J.P. Nagar P.S.), currently pending trial in Sessions Case No. 967/2016.

The petitioner faces prosecution for alleged offences punishable under Sections 399 (making preparation to commit dacoity) and 402 (assembling for purpose of committing dacoity) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Factual Background & Incident Summary

The prosecution’s case originates from an incident on May 14, 2015, at approximately 9:00 PM:

• Police Raid & Apprehension: Based on credible intelligence that six individuals armed with deadly weapons had assembled unlawfully near Spice Up Hotel, 9th Cross, J.P. Nagar 2nd Phase, Bengaluru, planning to attack and rob passersby, the complainant police officer and staff raided the spot.
• Arrest & Charge Sheet: The police apprehended the suspects, including Raja @ Kuttiyan (Accused No. 2). After completing the investigation, the police filed a charge sheet before the 5th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (A.C.M.M.), Bengaluru, following which the case was committed to the Sessions Court as S.C. No. 967/2016.
• Prior Bail & Default: The petitioner was previously granted bail and had been appearing before the court. However, due to communication gaps, misplacement of his mobile phone, and ill-health, he failed to appear during subsequent trial/committal stages, leading to a split-up charge sheet and the issuance of an NBW against him.
• Re-Arrest: Upon execution of the NBW, the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

Details of the Petitioner

• Name: Mr. Raja @ Kuttiyan (Accused No. 2)
• Father’s Name: Thangaraju
• Age: Approximately 31 years
• Residential Address: Near Mariyamma Temple, Ragigudda Quarters, J.P. Nagar 2nd Phase, Bengaluru City, Karnataka – 560078
• Legal Representation: Sri Santhosh A., Advocate

Submissions & Arguments

On Behalf of the Petitioner

1. Innocence & False Implication: The petitioner maintained that he is innocent and was falsely implicated in the case.
2. Investigation Complete: The investigation was complete, the charge sheet had been filed, and custodial interrogation was no longer required.
3. Reason for Non-Appearance: His previous absence was unintentional—caused by a misplaced mobile phone, lack of communication, and ill-health—rather than a deliberate attempt to flee justice.
4. No Flight Risk: Being a permanent resident of J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru, with deep roots in the community, there was no risk of absconding. He offered to furnish adequate sureties and abide by any conditions imposed by the court.

On Behalf of the Respondent (State)

1. Prima Facie Case: The Public Prosecutor argued that the charge sheet materials established a prima facie case under Sections 399 and 402 IPC.
2. Breach of Bail Conditions: The petitioner had violated previous bail terms by remaining absent, necessitating an NBW for his arrest.
3. Apprehension of Repeat Offence & Flight: The prosecution expressed concern that if enlarged on bail again, the petitioner might commit similar offences, intimidate witnesses, or abscond to delay trial proceedings.

Judicial Analysis & Legal Reasoning

The Sessions Court evaluated the merits of re-admitting the accused to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.:

1. Non-Capital Nature of Offences: The offences under Sections 399 and 402 IPC do not carry mandatory sentences of death or life imprisonment.
2. No Custodial Need: Since the investigation had concluded and the charge sheet was already before the court, further custodial detention served no useful purpose.
3. Settled Principles on Bail: Citing landmark decisions—including State v. Capt. Jagjit Singh (AIR 1962 SC 253) and CBI v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy (2013)—the court reaffirmed that key factors include the nature of accusations, character of evidence, likelihood of securing presence at trial, and preventing witness tampering.
4. Balancing Liberty and Trial Requirements: The court held that the prosecution’s concerns regarding trial attendance could be safeguarded by imposing strict conditions rather than keeping the petitioner incarcerated.

Final Court Order & Bail Conditions

Answering Point No. 1 in the affirmative, LXII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge Sri A. Earanna allowed the bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

The court ordered that Mr. Raja @ Kuttiyan be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 299/2015 (S.C. No. 967/2016) upon executing a personal bond for ₹1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum, subject to the following conditions:

1. Mandatory Attendance: The petitioner shall appear before the trial court on all hearing dates without fail, except under unavoidable circumstances.
2. Territorial Limits: He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission.
3. Witness Protection & Non-Recidivism: He shall not threaten prosecution witnesses, tamper with prosecution evidence, or indulge in similar offences.
4. Cancellation Clause: In the event of any breach of these conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to move the court for cancellation of bail.