KABC010085572024 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.3029 /2024 petitioner: Santhosh Kumar V. @ Salaga S/o Vasu, Aged about 19 years, Presently Residing at C/o Anila's Rented House, Near Iyyangar Bakery, 2nd Cross, Shivareddy Layout, Naganathpura, Bengaluru Urban, Bengaluru. Previously Residing at: No.839, Naganath Pura, Beretena Agrahara, Electronic City, Bengaluru South, Bengaluru-560100. (Accused No.4 in judicial custody) (By Sri.B.VenugopalaAdvocate) -V/S- 2 Crl.Misc.No.3029/2024 Respondent : State of Karnataka By Bellanduru Police Station, Bengaluru. (Represented by Learned Public Prosecutor)

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner u/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., praying to grant bail to him 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 commission of offences punishable u/Sec.395, 397 of IPC. The respondent police during the course of investigation of the case have arrested the petitioner on 17.03.2024 and produced him before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner was remanded to judicial custody by Learned Magistrate. It is further stated in the petition that the petitioner is innocent and he has valid and tenable defence. The petitioner is permanent resident of address mentioned in the cause title. He hails from a respectable family and he is the only bread earner of his entire family and he has old aged parents and dependents. The petitioner is ready to abide by any terms and conditions 3 Crl.Misc.No.3029/2024 imposed by this court for his enlargement on bail and he is ready to furnish suitable surety for his appearance before the court. Hence, the petitioner has 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 petitioner on the ground that the offence alleged to has been committed by the petitioner are grave in nature and against to society. It is further stated in the objection that petitioner 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 petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may abscond and he may not appear before Investigating Officer and he may hamper the investigation of the case. The petitioner may threaten the informant and other prosecution witnesses and he may try to destroy the evidence. The petitioner may commit similar offence in future. Hence, the learned Public Prosecutor has prayed to reject the petition filed by the petitioner.

4. Heard the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor

and learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the petition, objection and other materials on record. 4 Crl.Misc.No.3029/2024

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

consideration: (1) Whether the petitioner has 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 respondent police during the course of investigation of the case have arrested the petitioner on 17.03.2024 and produced him before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner was remanded to judicial custody by Learned Magistrate. The petitioner has produced the certified copy of the complaint, order sheet, certified copy of FIR, remand application and other documents. The petitioner is are shown as accused No.4 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 5 Crl.Misc.No.3029/2024 informant was riding the bicycle . At that time, the present petitioner 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 petitioner is now in judicial custody and as

such, the petitioner has filed the present petition praying to enlarge him on bail by contending that he is innocent and he has not committed the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime number. The name of the petitioner is 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 accused No.1 to 4 were arrested and their voluntary statement 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 petitioner is not required for further investigation of the case. 6 Crl.Misc.No.3029/2024 Whether the petitioner 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 petitioner and others have been seized from the possession of the petitioner 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 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 petitioner are

not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Further, the petitioner is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by the court for his enlargement on bail. The petitioner is ready to furnish surety to the satisfaction of the court for his appearance before the Investigating Officer. He is also ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case. The petitioner is the permanent residents of the Bengaluru and copy of their Adhaar card is also produced. As such, there is no chances of petitioner absconding or fleeing 7 Crl.Misc.No.3029/2024 from justice. The presence of the petitioner 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 petitioner and regarding petitioner 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 petitioner can be allowed and petitioner can be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the Affirmative.

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 petitioner/Accused No.4 u/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed. The petitioner/Accused No.4 is 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 petitioner executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for likesum to the satisfaction of the Learned Magistrate on the following further conditions:- CONDITIONS (1) The petitioner 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 8 Crl.Misc.No.3029/2024 which ever is earlier and he shall appear before I.O as and when called for during the course of investigation of the case and he shall co-operate with the investigation of the case. (2) The petitioner shall appear before the court regularly on all hearing dates during the trial of the case. (3) The petitioner 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 petitioner shall not commit offences of similar in nature or any other offences in future. (5) The petitioner shall furnish their correct address proof before the trial court. (6) The petitioner 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 petitioner. (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. 9 Crl.Misc.No.3029/2024