KABC010081662024 IN THE COURT OF THE LII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-53) Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2024 PRESENT Sri. B.G. Pramoda, B.A.L., LL.B., LII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore. Crl.Misc.No.2910 /2024 petitioners: 1. Pawan Kumar, S/o Nagaraj, Aged about 19 years, R/at:16th Cross, Naganathapura, Shiva Reddy Layout, Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru.

2. Vijay @ Ullala, S/o Ravi, Aged about 24 years, R/at:Nirmala's rented house, 2nd Main, Bengaluru School Road, Naganathapura, Bengaluru.

3. Satish Kumar @ Sade, S/o Kumar, Aged about 19 years, 2 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024

R/at: Shanthamma Building, 10th Cross, Shiva Reddy Layout, Naganathapura, Bengaluru. (Accused No.1, 3 and 5 in judicial custody) (By Sri.Noorpasha – Advocate) -V/S- Respondent : State of Karnataka By Bellanduru Police Station, Bengaluru. (Represented by Learned Public Prosecutor)

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioners u/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., praying to grant bail to them in Crime No.142/2024 of Bellanduru Police Station for the offences punishable u/Sec.395, 397 of IPC, pending on the file of learned 41st ACMM, Bengaluru.

2. It is stated in the petition that the respondent

Police have registered a case in Crime No.142/2024 against unknown persons alleging the offences punishable u/Sec.395, 397 of IPC. The respondent police during the course of investigation of the case have arrested the petitioners on 17.03.2024 and produced them before the learned Magistrate. The petitioners were remanded to judicial custody by Learned Magistrate. It is further stated in the 3 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024 petition that the petitioners are innocents and they have valid and tenable defence. The petitioners are permanent resident of address mentioned in the cause title. There is no overt act is attributed against the petitioners. The petitioners have got deep roots in the society and have no bad antecedents. The petitioners have to look after his aged parents and family members. The petitioners are ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this court for their enlargement on bail and they are ready to furnish suitable surety for their appearance before the court. Hence, the petitioners have prayed to allow their petition.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed the

objection to the petition along with I.O. report by opposing the grant of bail to the petitioners on the ground that the offence alleged to has been committed by the petitioners are grave in nature and against to society. It is further stated in the objection that petitioners and other accused have robbed mobile phone and ATM card from the informant and his cousin by assaulting with knife. It is further stated in the objection that the case is still at the investigation stage. If the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may abscond and they may not appear before Investigating Officer and they may hamper the investigation of the case. The petitioners may threaten the informant and other prosecution witnesses and 4 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024 they may try to destroy the evidence. The petitioners may commit similar offence in future. Hence, the learned Public Prosecutor has prayed to reject the petition filed by the petitioners.

4. Heard the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor

and learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the petition, objection and other materials on record.

5. Having done so, the following points will arise for my

consideration: (1) Whether the petitioners have made out grounds for granting anticipatory bail u/s.439 of Cr.P.C.? (2) What order?

6. My findings on the above points are as under:

(1) Point No.1 .. In the Affirmative (2) Point No.2 .. As per final order for the following: R E A S O N S

7. Point No.1:- The respondent Police have registered

a case in Crime No.142/2024 against the unknown persons alleging the offences punishable u/Sec.395, 397 of IPC, on the basis of complaint given by Nepal Ghosh. The 5 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024 respondent police during the course of investigation of the case have arrested the petitioners on 17.03.2024 and produced them before the learned Magistrate. The petitioners were remanded to judicial custody by Learned Magistrate. The petitioners have produced the certified copy of the complaint, order sheet, certified copy of FIR, remand application and other documents. The petitioners are shown as accused No.1, 3 and 5 in the remand application.

8. It is alleged in the FIR that on 03.03.202, at about

5.10 p.m. near Sai BABA Temple, Kalanayakanahalli, the informant was riding the bicycle . At that time, the present petitioners and other accused have surrounded the informant and asked him to give the valuable articles. When the informant has refused to give the same, the accused have assaulted the informant with knife on his back and robbed mobile from the informant. The accused have also assaulted the cousin of the informant with knife on back side of the head and robbed mobile phone and ATM card and ran away from the scooty in which they came to the spot.

9. The petitioners are now in judicial custody and as

such, the petitioners have filed the present petition praying to enlarge them on bail by contending that they are innocents and they have not committed the alleged offences and they 6 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024 have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime number. The name of the petitioners are not mentioned in the FIR or in the complaint. In the I.O. report, it is stated that statement of eyewitness who was present along with the informant at the time of the incident and further statement of the informant was recorded. It is further stated in the I.O. report that the voluntary statements of the petitioners was recorded. It is further stated that the vehicles alleged to have been used for commission of the offences and the mobile phones were seized by conducting mahazar. Substantial investigation of the case is already completed. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for further investigation of the case. Whether the petitioners and other accused have committed the alleged offences on the informant and his cousin or not and whether the mobile phones and other articles alleged to have been robbed by the petitioners and others have been seized from the possession of the petitioners and other accused or not has to be adjudicated only after full-fledged trial.

10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in

Balachandh @ Baliya (AIR 1977 SC 2447) and in many cases has held that has laid down the legal doctrine that “bail is a rule and jail is an exception”. This legal doctrine is laid down for safe guarding a fundamental right under article 21 of 7 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024 Constitution of India, granting the right to life and liberty. The petitioners are in judicial custody since from the date of his arrest.

11. The offences alleged against the petitioners are

not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Further, the petitioners are ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by the court for their enlargement on bail. The petitioners are ready to furnish surety to the satisfaction of the court for their appearance before the Investigating Officer. They are also ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case. The petitioners are the permanent residents of the Bengaluru. The presence of the petitioners during the course of investigation of the case can be secured by imposing suitable conditions. The apprehension of Learned Public Prosecutor regarding absconding of the petitioners and regarding petitioners threatening the prosecution witnesses and destroying the evidence can be make good by imposing suitable terms and conditions. Under these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the bail petition filed by the petitioners can be allowed and petitioners can be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the Affirmative. 8 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024

12. Point No.2:- In view of my findings on point No.1,

I proceed to pass the following: O R D E R The petition filed by the petitioners/Accused No.1, 3 and 5 u/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed. The petitioners/Accused No.1, 3 and 5 are enlarged on bail in Crime No.142/2024 of Bellanduru Police Station police station for the offence punishable u/Sec.395, 397 of IPC pending on the file of learned 41st ACMM Court, Bengaluru, on petitioners executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety for likesum each to the satisfaction of the Learned Magistrate on the following further conditions:- CONDITIONS (1) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer once in 15 days on Sunday for the period of two months or till the completion of investigation of the case which ever is earlier and they shall appear before I.O as and when called for during the course of investigation of the case and they shall co-operate with the investigation of the case. (2) The petitioners shall appear before the court regularly on all hearing dates during the trial of the case. (3) The petitioners 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer or any hamper with the evidence. (4) The petitioners shall not commit offences of similar in nature or any other offences in future. (5) The petitioners shall furnish their correct address proof before the trial court. 9 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024 (6) The petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. (7) Violation of any of the aforesaid conditions would entitle for cancellation of bail of the petitioners. (Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 3rd day of April, 2024). (B.G.Pramoda) LII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. 10 Crl.Misc.No.2910/2024