KABC010088812024
IN THE COURT OF XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-46)
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
PRESENT:
Sri. Manjunatha, B.A., LL.B.,
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
CRL. MISC. No.3148/2024
Petitioner
Srikanth.T.V.,
S/o Late Valasale Gowda,
a/a 27 Yrs.,
R/a No.1224, 2nd Floor, 2nd C Cross,
BDA Layout, Hosakerehalli,
Banashankari III Stage,
Bangalore-560 085.
(By Sri/Smt; Dayanand Hiremath,
Adv.,)
AND
Respondent
State by Girinagar 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.112/2024 in the interest of justice.

2
Crl.Misc.No.3148/2024
2. On perusal of the bail petition reveals that on the basis
of the information of complainant-Smt.Sajeevi, a/a 38 Yrs., the
respondent police have registered case in Crime No.112/2024
against the petitioner for the offences punishable U/s.341, 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.112/2024 of Girinagar P. S., at this stage as
sought for?
2. What order?
6. This court has answered the above points are as
under:-
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
Point No.2: As per final order
3
Crl.Misc.No.3148/2024
for the following:REASONS
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.112/2024 for the
offences punishable U/s..341, 354 and 504 of IPC on the
complaint of complainant-Smt.Sanjeevi, a/a 38 Yrs.,
8.It is the case of the complainant that the accused is the
tenant under the complainant and as per the agreement
Rs.1,00,000/- advance and Rs.12,000/- rent per month, but the
accused has paid only Rs.75,000/-, when she enquire the
accused, and he received Rs.10,000/- on the pretext that he
will vacate the house on the next month, when she requested
the accused to vacate the house, the accused filed a civil suit
against them.

On 26.03.2024 the accused came near the
house of complainant, picked up quarrel with her by abusing
threatened her with and assaulted by outraging her modesty by
insulting in public. 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
the petitioner for the offences punishable U/s.341, 354 and 504
of IPC, the said offence is not punishable with death or
4
Crl.Misc.No.3148/2024
imprisonment for life, the offence U/s.354 of IPC is though nonbailable, 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 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 nonbailable 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
cause title and this fact has not been disputed by the
prosecution, as such the presence of petitioner can be secured
5
Crl.Misc.No.3148/2024
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:ORDER
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.112/2024 of Girinagar 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.

6
Crl.Misc.No.3148/2024
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 6th day of April,
2024)
(Manjunatha)
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

MANJUNATH
RAMA NAIK
Digitally signed by
MANJUNATH RAMA NAIK
Date: 2024.04.25 16:35:19
+0530
7
Crl.Misc.No.3148/2024
Order pronounced in the open court
vide its separate order
ORDER
The bail petition filed by the petitioner
U/s.438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
(Manjunatha)
XLV ACC & SJ, Bengaluru.

8
Crl.Misc.No.3148/2024