1
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
KABC010017202023
IN THE COURT OF THE LXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL,
SESSIONS JUDGE: BENGALURU CITY
Dated this the 02 nd day of February, 2023
-: PRESENT :Sri R.RAVI, B.Sc., LL.B.,
LXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bangalore, (CCH-62)
CRL. MISC. No.544/2023
Petitioner/s
:
1
M.Gopi
S/o.Muniyappa
Aged about 26 years
R/a.Near Sun Shine School
ITI layout
Hosapalya
Bengaluru560 068.
(Accused-2 in JC)
(By Sri.M.V.Murthy,
Advocate,)
V/s
Respondent
:
State by Bandepalya P.S.,
Bengaluru City
Rep. by Public Prosecutor, City
Civil Court Complex,Bengaluru.

2
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
ORDERS ON BAIL APPLICATION ONE FILED BY THE
PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 439 OF Cr.P.C.
The case of the petitioner is that he is innocent of the
alleged offences and he is only a driver and at no point of time
he has committed the act as alleged in the complaint and
there is no any specific allegations made about him in the
complaint and only because he is one of the friend of the
complainant and since he is due to pay the amount which is
received from the complainant then the complainant has
falsely implicated him in the instant case and he is in judicial
custody since from the date of his arrest and he is the only
earning member in his family and he has got aged parents
who are depending upon him and there is no any specific
overt act attributed against him and he hails from respectable
family and has no previous bad antecedents and has got deep
roots in the society and he is permanent resident of
Bengaluru and has got permanent abode and as such there is
no chance of him fleeing away from justice & he is ready and
willing to abide by the terms and conditions that may be
imposed by the Court and he is also ready to offer surety to
the satisfaction of the court for his release on bail and since
the respondent police
have registered a false case in Cr.

No.05/2023 for the offences punishable under Section 364(A),
342, 506, 324 R/w. Section 34 of IPC then he prayed for
allowing the above application.

3
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
2. On the other hand the learned Public Prosecutor has
filed his objections along with the report of the I.O. & opposed
the above application that the grounds urged for seeking bail
are not satisfactory & materials placed on record prima-facie
discloses the involvement of the petitioner in commission of
the alleged heinous offences and now at this stage if
the
petitioner is granted bail then he may abscond & tamper the
prosecution witnesses which in turn may hamper the trial &
accordingly prayed for rejection of the bail petition.

3. I have heard the arguments of both sides & the points
that would arise for my consideration are as here under;
1) Whether the petitioner has made
out a prima-facie case for grant of bail
as prayed in the bail petition?
2) To what Order?

4. My findings on the above points are as follows:Point No.1 – In negative
Point No.2 – As per final Order, for the following;
R E A SON S
5. Point No.1:- On perusal of the FIR & complaint it is
alleged against the petitioner that on 09.01.2023 at about
8.30 p.m., when the complainant had been to hotel to have
4
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
his dinner then at that time the complainant’s known persons
i.e., Shabeer, Ajnan had come there and they asked
complainant to pay the balance amount for purchasing the
vehicle and for which the complainant informed them to give
the vehicle documents and then he would make the payment
for which the said Shabeer quarreled with him & called
petitioner, Adil, Khutu, Teju and forced him to pay the
amount and when the complainant informed them that he
had no money then the petitioner and other accused persons
kidnapped him forcibly to Managamanapalya for ransom and
locked him in a room and forced him to give money and
threated him to call his brother by showing knife and
assaulted him and caused him bleeding injuries and then
took him to a hotel situated at BTM layout and called his
mother over phone and abused her & asked his mother to pay
Rs.35,000/- and collected the said amount from his mother
and thereafter threatened her & thereby committed the
offences punishable under Section 364(A), 342, 506, 324
R/w. Section 34 of IPC.

6. Now it is the contention of the petitioner that he is
innocent and he has not committed any offences as alleged
and respondent police have foisted a false case against him
and he is ready & willing to abide by the conditions that may
be imposed by the Court.

5
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
7. On the other hand though the prosecution has
opposed the case of the petitioner, the same holds water as
the materials placed on record prima-facie shows the
involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged
heinous offence of kidnapping the complainant for ransom
which is punishable under Section 364(A) of IPC which
carries a punishment of death or life imprisonment.

8. And more over since the materials placed on report
including the report of the I.O. discloses that the petitioner &
the other accused with an intention to extract money have
assaulted the complainant and kidnapped him on a public
road & have committed the heinous offence of Section 364(A)
of
IPC
which
carries
a
punishment
of
death
or
life
imprisonment & since there is likelihood of threatening the
complainant & tampering of the prosecution witnesses by the
petitioner and since in the rulings of ILR 2016 KAR 1516 &
2010
SCC
496 it has been clearly held that ‘While
considering the bail application in the heinous offences,
the court has to consider the prima-facie materials and
reasonable grounds and also of the severity of the
punishment’ & since the petitioner has not made out any
cogent case with sufficient grounds as held in the above
judgment to grant the bail then I have answered the above
point No.1 in negative.

6
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
9.

Point No.2 :- In view of the discussion made on
point No.1 and further holding it in the negative, I proceed to
pass the following:O R DE R
The bail petition filed by the petitioner
u/s 439 of Cr.P.C., is hereby rejected.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced
by me in the open Court on this the 02nd day of February, 2023).

(R.RAVI)
LXI ACC & SJ, B’luru
R
RAVI
Digitally signed
by R RAVI
Date:
2023.02.03
12:47:37 +0530
7
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
02.02.2023
P-MVM
R-PP
Order
Order pronounced in open Court (vide separate
order) with the following operative portion:ORDER
The bail petition filed by the
petitioner
u/s
439
of
Cr.P.C.,
is
hereby rejected.

(R.RAVI)
LXI ACC & SJ, B’luru
8
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
9
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
10
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
06.01.2022
P-PRB
R-PP
Order
Order pronounced in open Court (vide separate
order) with the following operative portion:ORDER
The bail petition filed by the
petitioner u/s 439 of Cr.P.C., is
hereby allowed subject to following
conditions;
1. That the petitioner is ordered
to
be
released
No.170/2020)
on
bail
in
(Cr.

C.C.No.1287/2021
pending before IX ACMM, Bengaluru
on executing a personal bond for
Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for like
sum amount.
2. That the petitioner shall not
hold any threat to the complainant and
shall not tamper with any of the
prosecution
witnesses
directly
or
indirectly.
3. That the petitioner shall not
leave the jurisdiction of the court
without prior permission
11
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
4.

That
the
petitioner
shall
furnish his residential address proof
and that of his surety.
5. That the petitioner shall not
indulge in similar type of offences in
future.
6.

That
the
petitioner
shall
appear before the trial court regularly
without fail on receipt of the summons.
7. That if the petitioner fails to
obey any of the above said conditions,
then
this
bail
order
automatically
stands cancelled.
(R.RAVI)
LXI ACC & SJ, B’luru
12
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023
13
Crl.Misc. No.544/2023