KABC010082922024 IN THE COURT OF XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-46) DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 PRESENT: Sri. Manjunatha, B.A., LL.B., XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. CRL. MISC. No.2938/2024 Petitioner K. Manjunath S/o Krishnappa, a/a 35 Yrs., R/A No.11, 4th Cross, Krishnappa Compound, Shanthi Layout, RM Nagar, Bengaluru-560 016. (By Sri/Smt; G. Udaykumar, Adv.,) AND Respondent State by Krishnarajapuram, P. S., Bengaluru. (By the learned Public Prosecutor) ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED U/S.438 OF Cr.P.C., The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed bail petition U/s.438 of Cr.P.C., to grant anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner and also direct the respondent police to release him on bail in the event of his arrest in their Crime No.25/2024 in the interest of justice.

2. On perusal of the bail petition reveals that on the basis

of the information of complainant-Smt. Chandrakala, a/a 50 Crl.Misc.No.2938/2024 Yrs., the respondent police have registered case in Crime No.252/2024 against the petitioner for the offences punishable U/s.324, 354 and 504 of IPC. The petitioner being accused apprehending his arrest by the respondent police. Therefore, the petitioner has constrained to file this petition to grant bail.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed objection in

detail by reiterating the contents of the complaint and contended that this bail petition is not maintainable in law or on facts of the case. Further contended that if petitioner is granted bail then he again involve in causing harassment to the complainant and also chance of destroying the evidence by tampering the witnesses. Accordingly, prayed for rejection of bail petition.

4. Heard the arguments on both sides and perused the

materials on record.

5. The following points that arises for consideration of this

Court:

1. Whether the petitioner has made out sufficient

grounds for granting anticipatory bail in his favour in Cr.No.25/2024 of Krishnarajapuram P. S., at this stageassoughtfor?

2. Whatorder?

6. This court has answered the above points are as

under:- PointNo.1: IntheAffirmative PointNo.2: Asperfinalorder forthefollowing:- Crl.Misc.No.2938/2024 R E A S O N S

7. Point No.1: On considering the papers on record, it is

evident to note that the Respondent Police have registered a case against the Petitioner in Crime No.25/2024 for the offences punishable U/s.324, 354 and 5904 of IPC on the complaint of complainant-Smt.Smt. Chandrakala, a/a 50 Yrs., 8.It is the case of the complainant that on 10.01.2024 at 9.00 p.m husband of the complainant lit fire to boil the water, accused came and told to stop the fire, as his house painting is going on. When husband of the complainant told the accused now it is not possible they will stop fire after some time, enraged with the same picked up quarrel with the husband of the complainant by abusing filthy language, brought a iron rod, kept in the car, hit on the head and stomach of husband of complainant causing bleeding injury, when she intervened she sustained injuries to her left hand, and son of complainant intervenes, accused assaulted him also with iron rod by causing bleeding injuries. When complainant went to question the same, the accused dragged her saree by outraging her modesty. Accordingly, complainant has filed complaint against the accused persons before respondent police. 9.The contention of petitioner is that he is innocent of the offence alleged against him and he has not committed any such offence. On the contrary the prosecution has submitted unless a full-fledged trial is complete, the petitioner cannot be considered as innocent at this point of time. 10.It is pertinent to note that even for the sake of argument, it is accepted that there is prima facie case against Crl.Misc.No.2938/2024 the petitioner for the offences punishable U/s.324. 354 and 504 of IPC, the said offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, the offence U/s.354 of IPC is though non- bailable, but not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, it is exclusively triable by the Magistrate . 11.It is well settled principle of law that the granting of bail is discretionary power of the Court and every case should be considered on the basis of facts of each case. The certified copies of complaint and FIR produced by the petitioner discloses that there was apprehension on of his arrest by the respondent police for the alleged non-bailable offence. Though the offences are non-bailable, but not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The entire fact has to be gathered only after full fledged trial. But at this juncture, it is clear that there is an apprehension that the petitioner might be arrested in non- bailable offence for interrogation by the respondent police for enquiry. By considering all the above facts and arguments canvased by prosecution it is found that if stringent conditions are imposed on the appearance of the petitioner before the I.O.,/Court the purpose of prosecution objection that petitioner would not appear for enquiry before I.O., and trial before Court would be met with. At this juncture, it is equally important to note that when the petitioner is ready to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by the court and when ready to face the trial by offering adequate surety, this court is satisfied and is of the opinion that no purpose will be served by allowing the respondent police to apprehend the petitioner for interrogation. The petitioner is the the permanent resident as shown in the Crl.Misc.No.2938/2024 cause title and this fact has not been disputed by the prosecution, as such the presence of petitioner can be secured easily, hence, the question of absconding of the petitioner does not arise at all. The objections raised by the learned Public Prosecutor can be met by imposing stringent conditions. There is absolutely no ground made out by the prosecution to reject this bail petition. Accordingly, under these circumstances, the petitioner has made out sufficient ground for granting anticipatory bail in his favour at this stage as prayed for as there exist reason to believe that he may be arrested in non-bailable offences. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in the affirmative.

12. Point No.2: In view of answer of this Court on point

No.1, this court pass the following:- O R D E R The bail petition filed by the Petitioner U/s.438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned I.O.,/Magistrate in the event of his arrest in the case in Crime No.25/2024 of Krishnarajapuram P. S., subject to following conditions: 1.The Petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the I.O. as and when required till the final report is filed. Further, he shall assist the I.O. in further investigation of the case. He shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., first Sunday of every month in between 10.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. before the I.O., till filing of final report or further orders whichever is earlier. Crl.Misc.No.2938/2024 2.The Petitioner shall surrender before the concerned Police within 30 days from the date of this order without fail. 3.He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the concerned I.O., 4.He shall not hamper further investigation of the case and tamper with prosecution witnesses in any manner and shall not intimidate the complainant. 5.He shall not commit similar offences or any offences in future, 6.He shall appear before the concerned Magistrate Court as and when directed. 7.He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Bengaluru City without prior permission. 8.He shall not change his place of residence outside the jurisdiction of Bengaluru City without prior intimation, and 9.He shall furnish notarized copy of his residential id address proof. 10.In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the above bail shall stand automatically canceled. (Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer directly on Computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 5th day of April, 2024) (Manjunatha) XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Digitally signed by MANJUNATH MANJUNATHNAIK RAMA RAMA NAIK Date: 2024.04.25 16:02:39 +0530 Crl.Misc.No.2938/2024 Order pronounced in the open court vide its separate order O R D E R The bail petition filed by the petitioner U/s.438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. (Manjunatha) XLV ACC & SJ, Bengaluru.