KABC010018202023
IN THE COURT OF LXV ADDL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-66)
PRESENT
SHRI. HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R ,
B.A.L., L.L.B.,
LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
Dated this the 25 th day of January, 2023
Crl.Misc.No.585/2023
PETITIONER:-
P. CHAKRADHARI,
s/o P. Lakshmana,
Aged about 46 years,
R/at No.113, RTT Building
Indramma Housing Scheme,
Near Sukalamma Temple,
Gunthakal Town & Taluk,
Ananthapura District,
Andhra Pradesh.
[Accused No.2]
(By Sri. BKR., Advocate)
V/s.

RESPONDENT:-
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
By City Market Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(Rep. by Public Prosecutor)
2
Crl.Misc.No.585/2023
ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED UNDER
SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C
This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to
enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.7/2023 registered by City
Market police station for the offences punishable under Section 392 of
IPC.
2.

Facts of the case.-
The complainant has filed complaint alleging that he is running
shop under the name and style of Shubham Traders at Balepete,
Bengaluru.

On 11.01.2023 at about
10.30 pm., the complainant
closed the shop and went to house when he reached behind Srinath
Lodge, Laxman Rao road, one unknown person came and caught hold
the complainant and nabbed the amount of Rs.5,000/- and threatened
the complainant by putting the knife under the neck, later the
complainant screamed at that time he ran away from the spot.
Alleging the same the complainant has lodged the complaint. The
police on receipt of the said complaint have registered the case in
Crime No.7/2023 for the offences punishable under Section 392 r/w
Section 34 of IPC.
3.

The petitioner being aggrieved by the same has filed this
petition on the following among other grounds. The petitioner submit
that he is innocent of the alleged offences, he has not at all committed
any offences, he has been falsely implicated in the above case. The
petitioner submits that at no point of time the petitioner involved in the
alleged crime either directly or indirectly and there is no specific over
act attributed against the petitioner. The petitioner submits that the
name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR as well as complaint
of the complainant. The petitioner submits that he is permanent
3
Crl.Misc.No.585/2023
resident of address mentioned in the cause and having deep roots in
the society and has no bad antecedents and offences alleged against
the petitioner are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life
and he is ready and willing to abide by the conditions imposed by this
court and undertake to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the
petitioner prays to allow the regular bail petition.
4.

After service of notice, the learned Public Prosecutor has
appeared and filed objection contending that the investigation is still in
progress and the offences alleged against the petitioner is heinous in
nature and also further contended that on perusal of the complaint
there is a prima facie case against the accused persons for having
committed the alleged offences. The learned Public Prosecutor has
also further contended that the investigation is still in progress and the
I.O. has to record the statements of witnesses and also he has to
secure the documents.

The learned Public Prosecutor has further
contended that at this stage if the bail petition of the petitioner is
allowed there is every chances of threatening the prosecution
witnesses, destroying the evidence and may abscond and hamper the
trial. Hence, the learned Public Prosecutor prays to reject the regular
bail petition.
5.

Heard the arguments. Now the points that arise for my
consideration.-
6.

1.

Whether the petitioner has made out
sufficient ground to allow the petition
filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C?

2.

What order?
My answer to the above points are.Point No.1:–
In the Affirmative
4
Point No.2:–
Crl.Misc.No.585/2023
As per final order
for the following
REASONS
7.

Point No.1:-
The petitioner counsel has addressed the
arguments contending that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged
offences and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
petitioner
counsel has further contended that the petitioner is not
involved in the alleged offences and he was returning home after
completing his work the police have pick the petitioner from his home
as he does not know the local language Kannada and the petitioner
has been falsely implicated in the present case.

The petitioner
counsel has further contended that from the date of arrest the
petitioner is in judicial custody and has further contended that the
petitioner is the only earning member of the family and aged parent
and the petitioner is very young aged if he is detained in judicial
custody his future will be spoiled. The petitioner counsel has further
contended that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the
conditions imposed by this court and co-operate with the investigation.
Hence, prays to allow the bail petition.
8.

The learned Public Prosecutor has addressed the
arguments contending that the offences alleged against the petitioner
is grievous in nature and the complaint averments prima facie shows
that the petitioner and others have committed the alleged offences.
The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that the
investigation is still in progress and the I.O. has to collect the evidence
and record the statements of witnesses. The learned Public Prosecutor
has further contended that at this stage if the bail petition of the
petitioner is allowed there is every chances of threatening the
5
Crl.Misc.No.585/2023
prosecution witnesses, destroying the evidence and may abscond and
hamper the trial. Hence, the learned Public Prosecutor prays to reject
the regular bail petition.
9.

On perusal of the records it is noticed that the complainant
is running shop under the name and style of Shubham Traders at
Balepete, Bengaluru.

On 11.01.2023 at about
10.30 pm., the
complainant closed the shop and went to house when he reached
behind Srinath Lodge, Laxman Rao road, one unknown person came
and caught hold the complainant and nabbed the amount
of
Rs.5,000/- and threatened the complainant by putting the knife under
the neck, later the complainant screamed at that time he ran away
from the spot. As such the complainant has lodged the complaint. The
police on receipt of the said complaint have registered the case in
Crime No.7/2023 for the offences punishable under Section 392 r/w
Section 34 of IPC. The petitioner from the date of arrest is in judicial
custody and from 12.01.2023 to 25.01.2023 the judicial custody of the
accused persons have been extended. The police have not taken the
said accused persons to police custody for investigation as such it
shows that the accused persons are not required for investigation.
The offences alleged against the petitioner is not punishable with
imprisonment for life or death. The apprehension of the prosecution is
that the petitioner belongs to Rajasthan State if the bail application of
the said accused
is granted, there is every chances of accused
abscond and hamper the trial. The said apprehension of the
prosecution can be satisfied by imposing stringent conditions. The
guilt of the accused
has to be proved during the course of trial.

Admittedly, the petitioner is resident of the address shown in the cause
title. If at all during the course of trial, the prosecution is able to prove
Crl.Misc.No.585/2023
6
the guilt of the petitioner, he can be dealt with in accordance with law.
Considering all these facts, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can
be enlarged on bail by imposing certain conditions, which would meet
the apprehension of prosecution. Accordingly, I answer the point No.1
in the ‘Affirmative’.
10.

Point No.2:- In view of the findings given on point No.1, I
proceed to pass the following.ORDER
The
petition
filed
by
the
petitioner/accused No.2 under Section 439
Cr.P.C., is allowed.
The petitioner/accused No.2 is ordered
to be released on bail in Crime No.7/2023
registered for the offences punishable under
Section 392 r/w Section 34 of IPC, on
execution of personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/with one surety for the likesum subject to the
following
CONDITIONS:1.

The petitioner shall appear before the court
on all the dates of hearing.

2.

The petitioner shall appear before the I.O
whenever he is called upon for the purpose
of further investigation.

3.

The petitioner shall not involve in any
criminal activities.

7
Crl.Misc.No.585/2023
4.

The petitioner shall not tamper with the
evidence and shall not threaten, induce
allure the prosecution witnesses in
whatsoever manner.

5.

The petitioner shall appear before the I.O
twice in a month at 9.00 am., to 9.00 pm., till
filing of the charge sheet.

6.

The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction
of the court without prior permission of the
court.

7.

The petitioner to produce permanent address
proof document.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and then pronounced by
me in the Open Court on this 25th day of January, 2023)
(HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R)
LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.