The Court of the LXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-69), presided over by Sri Sabappa, B.Com., LL.B. (Spl.), delivered a judicial order on May 15, 2024, allowing an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The ruling in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2983/2024 extended pre-arrest bail protection to Sri Varuna S. (Accused No. 1) in connection with Crime No. 306/2023 (subsequently registered as C.C. No. 7456/2024) of the Hanumanthanagar Police Station, Bengaluru, pending before the jurisdictional court. The petitioner faced apprehension of arrest for alleged offences punishable under Sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Factual Matrix and Prosecution Allegations

The criminal proceedings originated from a street altercation and complaint lodged by a local merchant:

• The Incident: According to the complaint filed by Sri Sharath, on December 1, 2023, at approximately 8:30 PM, three unknown persons arrived on an Access and a Dio scooter near the complainant’s clothing shop named “Urban Style” at Hanumanthanagar, honking loudly. When the complainant stepped outside, the individuals inquired about a person named Hemanth and subsequently demanded new clothes.
• The Assault: Upon the complainant’s refusal, the individuals claimed to be local rowdies, slapped the complainant, and attempted to assault him with a long (a deadly weapon). The complainant managed to dodge the blow, and the assailants fled when members of the public gathered.
• Investigation and Charge Sheet: Following the complaint, police registered Crime No. 306/2023. During the course of the investigation, co-accused were arrested and subsequently granted bail, while the investigation culminated in the filing of a final charge sheet (C.C. No. 7456/2024).

Details of the Petitioner

• Name: Sri Varuna S. (Petitioner / Accused No. 1)
• Father’s Name: Sri Shantha Raj. B
• Age: About 26 years
• Residential Address: No. 227/3, 11th Main, Pipeline, Kalappa Block, Srinagar, Banashankari, Bengaluru – 560 050.
• Legal Representation: Sri Lokesha M.S., Advocate
• Prosecution Representation: Learned Public Prosecutor, State by Hanumanthanagar Police Station

Submissions Advanced by the Parties

On Behalf of the Petitioner

1. Innocence and False Implication: The defense maintained that the petitioner was innocent, that the complaint was lodged with an inordinate delay naming unknown persons, and that the petitioner’s name did not originally feature in the FIR.
2. Parity and Completion of Investigation: Counsel emphasized that co-accused (Accused Nos. 2 and 3) had already been enlarged on bail by the Sessions Court in December 2023, entitling the petitioner to parity. Furthermore, since the police had already completed the investigation and filed the final charge sheet, custodial interrogation was no longer necessary.

On Behalf of the Respondent (State)

1. Opposition to Pre-Arrest Bail: The learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the petition, filing detailed objections highlighting that the petitioner was a rowdy sheeter with multiple criminal antecedents in different police stations.
2. Banishment and Recidivism: The state pointed out that the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru, had previously issued externment (banishment) orders against the petitioner, and returning to the city to commit further offences demonstrated habitual criminality, creating a high risk of abscondence and witness tampering.

Judicial Findings and Legal Reasoning

Upon evaluating the records, case papers, and rival submissions, Judge Sabappa recorded definitive findings on Point No. 1:

1. Completion of Investigation: The court observed that unlike earlier stages when the police were actively searching for the suspect, the investigation had since concluded with the filing of the final charge sheet (C.C. No. 7456/2024), rendering custodial interrogation unnecessary.
2. Principle of Parity: Acknowledging that co-accused facing similar allegations had already been granted bail by the court, the judge held that the petitioner stood on similar footing and was entitled to relief on the ground of parity.
3. Balancing Liberty and Conditions: While noting the prosecution’s contentions regarding criminal antecedents and externment orders, the court reiterated that past involvement alone is insufficient to deny bail when the investigation is complete, and any apprehension of interference can be adequately addressed by imposing stringent conditions.

Final Anticipatory Bail Order and Conditions Imposed

Answering Point No. 1 in the affirmative, the Sessions Court allowed the petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

The court ordered that Sri Varuna S. be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 306/2023 (C.C. No. 7456/2024) of Hanumanthanagar Police Station, upon executing a personal bond for ₹50,000/- with one surety for the like sum, subject to the following strict conditions:

1. Surrender Timeline: The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 30 days from the date of the order.
2. No Witness Tampering: The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly in any manner.
3. Court Attendance: He shall regularly appear before the concerned court as and when required.
4. Address Continuity: He shall not abscond from his ordinary residence and must furnish his address proof to the concerned police.
5. Non-Recidivism: He shall not indulge in any kind of offence.
6. Jurisdictional Restriction: He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.