In an order passed on April 27, 2024, the LXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-69), Sri Sabappa, B.Com., LL.B. (Spl.), allowed the regular bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3076/2024. The court granted regular bail to Manukumar (Accused No. 2), who had been re-arrested following non-appearance and non-bailable warrant (NBW) execution in connection with Crime No. 04/2015, registered by the Kumaraswamy Layout Police Station. The petitioner faces charges under Sections 120(B) (criminal conspiracy), 302 (murder), and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Factual Background & Case History
The prosecution’s case stems from an incident dating back to late 2014 and early 2015:
- Missing Person Report & Initial FIR: On December 30, 2014, one Shivanna approached the police stating that his nephew, Mahesh, was missing. The Kumaraswamy Layout Police initially registered Cr. No. 01/2015 against unknown persons.
- Confession & Body Recovery: During the investigation, police arrested Accused No. 1, who confessed that he and Manukumar (Accused No. 2) summoned Mahesh to Honganur Village on December 30, 2014, committed his murder, and dumped the dead body into the Vrushabhavathi River canal near Nice Road, Kengeri, to destroy evidence. The body was later recovered near Kambipura and identified by the deceased’s brother, Jagadish.
- Re-registration & Initial Bail: The case was re-registered under Cr. No. 04/2015 for offences under Sections 120(B), 302, and 201 read with Section 34 IPC. Manukumar was arrested and remanded to judicial custody, but was subsequently enlarged on regular bail by the trial court.
- Abscondance & Re-arrest: During ongoing trial proceedings (where several witnesses had been examined and the matter was posted for cross-examination of PW.8), the petitioner failed to appear. The court issued Non-Bailable Warrants (NBW) and proclamation orders. Police arrested the petitioner upon execution of the NBW, remanded him back to judicial custody, and registered an additional case under Section 229(A) IPC (failure to appear by person released on bail) under Cr. No. 82/2024.
Details of the Petitioner
- Name: Manukumar (Accused No. 2)
- Father’s Name: Nagarajachar
- Age: Approximately 35 years
- Residential Address: Honganur Village, Channapatna Taluk, Ramanagara District
- Occupation: Carpenter
- Legal Representation: Sri Sharath J.M., Advocate
Arguments Advanced
On Behalf of the Petitioner
- Reason for Absence: The petitioner is a carpenter who frequently moves across districts for work, which led to his inadvertent absence from court dates and non-receipt of court notices.
- No Custodial Trial Needed: The investigation in the primary case had long been completed, charge-sheet filed, and trial was underway.
- Roots in Society: The petitioner owns movable/immovable properties, comes from a respectable family, and undertook to strictly abide by any conditions imposed by the court.
On Behalf of the Respondent (State)
- Grave Allegations: The Public Prosecutor, supported by the report of the Police Inspector (Kumaraswamy Layout P.S.), argued that the petitioner is charged under Section 302 IPC, an offence punishable with death or life imprisonment.
- High Flight Risk: The petitioner had previously jumped bail, stayed abscondant, forced court notices to sureties via the Police Commissioner, and attracted an additional case under Section 229(A) IPC.
- Risk of Witness Tampering: Releasing him at the stage of witness cross-examination posed a significant risk of witness tampering and further delaying the trial.
Judicial Reasoning & Findings
The court carefully weighed the competing arguments regarding the petitioner’s past non-attendance versus his right to pre-trial/ongoing-trial liberty under Section 439 Cr.P.C.:
- Stage of Trial: The court noted that the case was actively in trial with witness examinations underway (including recall applications under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for PW.8 and summons/BW issued for CWs 5, 14, 17–19).
- Custodial Status: Both Accused No. 1 and Accused No. 2 had been re-apprehended via NBW and were currently in judicial custody.
- Imposition of Safeguards: The court held that while the petitioner’s prior absence caused delay, his continued incarceration during trial would cause undue hardship to his family. The court concluded that prosecution interests and trial attendance could be effectively secured by applying stringent conditions, specifically requiring a Government Servant as a surety.
Final Court Order & Bail Conditions
The petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was allowed. The court ordered the release of Manukumar on regular bail in connection with Cr. No. 04/2015, subject to executing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, under the following mandatory conditions:
- Government Servant Surety: Out of the two sureties, one surety MUST be a Government Servant.
- Next Hearing Appearance: The petitioner shall appear before the trial court on the very next date of hearing.
- Regular Attendance: He shall regularly appear before the court on every date of hearing without fail.
- No Witness Tampering: He shall not directly or indirectly tamper with prosecution witnesses in any manner.
- Fixed Abode & Address Proof: He shall not abscond from his ordinary residence and must furnish verified address proof to the concerned police station.
- No Further Offences: He shall not indulge in any kind of offence.
- Territorial Limits: He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.
The order explicitly notes that any violation of these conditions grants the Investigating Officer liberty to move for immediate cancellation of bail, and the release order is subject to custody not being required in any other case.