Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
1
KABC010089922024
IN THE COURT OF THE LVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH 57)
: Present :
Sri.Jai Shankar, B.Sc., LL.M.,
LVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
Dated this the 1st Day of June, 2024.
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
PETITIONER
1. Srinivasmurthy @ Chinnu
S/o Guru Murthy
Aged about 32 years
R/at No.14, B Block
Ramachandrapura
Jalahalli Post
Bengaluru 560 013
(By Sri. Jagadeesh H. Advocate)
V/s
RESPONDENT
State of Karnataka
By Vidyaranyapua Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(Rep. by: Public Prosecutor)
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
2
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner under Section
439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in Cr.No.46/2019
(S.C.No.1249/2019) pending on the file of this court for
the offence punishable under Sec.302 of IPC.
2. The petitioner has sought for bail on the grounds
that, he is innocent of the alleged offence and he has got
valid and tenable defence in his favour. The allegation
made against the petitioner are all false. He is no way
connected with the alleged offence and police have falsely
implicated him. He was not present at the alleged
incident place and he has no previous illwill or rivalry to
commit
the offence.
He
was enlarged on
bail in
Crl.Misc.No.7578/2019 dated 07.02.2020 by Hon’ble
High Court of Karnataka. After furnishing the surety, he
was released on 05.03.2020. After that, he was regularly
appearing before the court. Due to covid19 pandemic, he
was not able appear before the court. Hence, this court
3
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
had issued NBW against him. Later, he was taken to
judicial custody and again he was enlarged on bail in
Crl.Misc.No.6760/2021. He had furnished the surety on
16.02.2022. After that, he appeared before the court on
11.03.2022. Later, he was not able to appear before the
court from 11.04.2022 till 26.01.2024 due to illness. He
was suffering from jaundice and was taking Ayurvedic
treatment. The absence of petitioner is not intentional
one and due to bonafide reasons. He undertakes to
appear before the court regularly in future. The petitioner
has no criminal antecedents. He is a coolie and his family
is depending on his income. If he is detained in Prison,
his whole carrier will be spoiled in the midst of the other
criminal. He has age old parents who are totally
depending on him. He is in judicial custody since
26.01.2024. Since investigation is completed, there is no
necessity of detaining him in judicial custody. He is the
permanent resident of Bengaluru and as such he will
neither abscond, nor flee away from justice. He is ready
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
4
and willing to offer surety to the satisfaction of the court.
On all these grounds, the petitioner has prayed to allow
the petition.
3. The prosecution has filed statement of objections
and
has
contended
that,
the
application
is
not
maintainable in law or on facts. The complainant police
have registered the case against him for the offence
punishable under Sec.302 of IPC and they have also filed
charge sheet after investigation. The offence is serious in
nature and punishable with death or imprisonment for
life. The accused is involved in the offence and there are
prima facie materials against him. If the accused is
released on bail, he may involve in similar kind of offence
and he may also tamper with the prosecution witness.
The accused was absconding and later he has been
arrested under NBW. As such if he is released, he may
abscond again. On all these grounds, the prosecution has
sought for dismissal of the petition.
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
5
4.
I have heard the arguments of both sides and
perused the materials on record.
5.
The points that arise for my consideration are:
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
regular bail as provided under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?
2. What order?
6.
My findings on the above points are as follows;
Point No.1
:
In the Affirmative
Point No.2
:
As per final order for the
following :
REASONS
7.
Point No.1: The case of the prosecution is
that, on 01.04.2019 at about 10.45 to 11.00 p.m, the
accused came to the house of deceased Deviprasad @
Prathap and picked up quarrel with him with regard to
the money given by him to
the deceased to bring alcohol
and then, assaulted him with peace of wood and ran
6
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
away from the spot. The deceased was shifted to the
hospital
and
he
died
on
02.04.2019.
After
the
investigation charge sheet has been filed.
8.
Certified copy of the order sheet of this case
produced by the counsel for the petitioner reveal that,
after registering the case, the accused was in judicial
custody. Later, as per the order passed by the Hon’ble
High Court of Karnataka in Crl.P.No.7578/2019 dated
07.02.2020, he was granted bail and he was released on
05.03.2020. Then, he appeared before the court on next
date of hearing i.e. on 12.03.2020. After that, due to
covid19 the courts were closed and later reopened. The
matter was posted on 25.03.2021. But, the accused did
not appear and as such warrant was issued against him.
He was arrested and produced before the court on
12.04.2021 and he was in judicial custody. After that, he
was granted bail again in Crl.Misc.No.6760/2021 and he
was released on 16.02.2022. After that, he appeared on
7
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
11.03.2022 and again he remained absent. He was
arrested and produced again on 26.01.2024 and now, he
is in judicial custody. In the petition it is stated that, the
accused No.1 was suffering from jaundice for the past 2
years and he was taking Ayurvedic treatment. Because of
the said reason, he could not appear before the court.
During the course of arguments, the counsel for the
petitioner submitted that, the petitioner undertakes to
appear regularly and he is the only earning member of
the family. Considering the facts, that the accused was
on bail earlier and since it is stated that he was suffering
from jaundice, I am of the opinion that it is just and
proper to grant bail to the accused by imposing suitable
conditions. The apprehension of the prosecution that, he
may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and he may
involve in similar kind of offenece, may be met by
imposing suitable conditions. As for as his appearance
before the court is concerned, suitable condition can be
imposed. Hence it would be appropriate to release the
8
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
accused on bail. Accordingly point No.1 is answered in
the Affirmative.
9.
Point No.2:
In view of my findings on point
No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioner under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed, subject
to the following conditions:
1)
The petitioner shall execute personal
bond for Rs.1,00,000/ with two sureties for
the likesum.
2)
He shall appear before the court regularly
without fail.
3) He shall not threaten or allure the
prosecution witness in whatsoever manner.
4) He shall not get involved in any criminal
activities.
5) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the
court without prior permission of the court.
(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed by her, corrected and then pronounced
by me in the Open Court on this the 1st Day of June, 2024)
(Jai Shankar)
LVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
9
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
10
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
Order pronounced in open Court
(Vide separate order)
ORDER
The petition filed by the
petitioner under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed,
subject
to
the
following
conditions:
1)
The
petitioner
shall
execute
personalbond
for
Rs.1,00,000/ with two sureties
for the likesum.
2)
He shall appear before the
court regularly without fail.
3) He shall not threaten or
allure the prosecution witness
in whatsoever manner.
11
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
4) He shall not get involved in
any criminal activities.
5) He shall not leave the
jurisdiction of the court without
prior permission of the court.
LVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions
Judge, Benguru.
12
09.04.2021
P M.V.M.
R PP
Crl.Misc.No.3187/2024
Order pronounced in open
Court (Vide separate order)
ORDER
The petition filed by the
petitioners under Section
439 of Cr.P.C., is hereby
dismissed.
LVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions
Judge, Benguru.