A City Civil and Sessions Court in Bengaluru has granted anticipatory bail to Shankar V, who was accused of assaulting a man and setting his motorcycle on fire near a political party office in Yeshwanthpura. The order was delivered by Sri B.G. Pramoda, the LII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, on June 28, 2022. The court observed that the custodial interrogation of the accused was not necessary at this stage, as the offences alleged, while serious, were not punishable by death or life imprisonment.

The petitioner, 34-year-old Shankar V, a resident of Yeshwanthpura, approached the court seeking protection from arrest following the registration of an FIR in Crime No. 191/2022. The Yeshwanthpura police had booked him under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act.

Background of the Case and Allegations

The legal proceedings were initiated based on a complaint filed by one T.V. Ashok Kumar. According to the prosecution, the incident took place on the night of June 3, 2022, around 10:15 p.m. near the Congress party office in V.R. Layout. It was alleged that Shankar V (Accused No. 1) picked up a quarrel with Ashok Kumar and abused him using filthy language.

The complaint further stated that the confrontation escalated when Shankar V and his associates allegedly assaulted Kumar and issued threats to his life. The most serious allegation involved the destruction of property; the accused and his friends were alleged to have set fire to Ashok Kumar’s Pulsar motorcycle, causing significant financial loss and creating a public disturbance.

Legal Provisions and Charges

The Yeshwanthpura police registered the case under the following legal provisions:

Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code: Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.

Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code: Punishment for wrongful restraint.

Section 435 of the Indian Penal Code: Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage to property.

Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code: Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace.

Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code: Punishment for criminal intimidation.

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code: Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.

Section 2(a) of the Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property (PDLP) Act: Dealing with mischief causing damage to public or private property.

Arguments Presented by Both Sides

Counsel for the petitioner argued that Shankar V was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the crime. The defense contended that the police were making hectic efforts to arrest him, causing unnecessary harassment to his family and neighbours. They emphasized that Shankar is a permanent resident of Bengaluru with no prior criminal record and was willing to cooperate fully with the investigating agency.

The Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the grant of bail, arguing that the acts committed were grave and directed against the peace of society. The prosecution highlighted the arson of the motorcycle as a serious mischief and expressed concerns that if released, the petitioner might abscond, threaten the informant, or destroy evidence.

Court’s Observations and Ruling

Judge B.G. Pramoda, after reviewing the FIR and the nature of the allegations, noted that the primary non-bailable offence involved was under the PDLP Act. However, the court pointed out that the offences are triable by a Magistrate and do not carry the maximum penalty of death or life imprisonment.

The court referred to the landmark Arnesh Kumar guidelines issued by the Supreme Court of India, which caution against unnecessary arrests in cases where the punishment is less than seven years. The judge observed that whether the petitioner actually committed the acts or not is a matter for trial and cannot be decided at the bail stage. Furthermore, the court found that the presence of the accused for investigation could be secured through stringent conditions rather than incarceration.

Terms and Conditions of the Bail

The court allowed the petition and directed that in the event of his arrest, Shankar V must be released on bail subject to the execution of a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and one surety of a like sum. The court imposed the following mandatory conditions:

1. The petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer within three weeks to furnish necessary information and documents.
2. He must cooperate with the investigation and appear whenever summoned.
3. He is strictly prohibited from threatening or inducing the informant or any witnesses.
4. He must not attempt to destroy any evidence related to the case.
5. He is barred from leaving India without prior permission from the court.
6. He must not commit any similar offences in the future.

The judge warned that any violation of these terms would lead to the immediate cancellation of the bail. With this order, the court balanced the necessity of a police investigation with the petitioner’s right to personal liberty.