In a recent judicial development, the LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge in Bengaluru has granted bail to Raghu, also known as Dio Raghu, who was in judicial custody following the issuance of a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW). The court’s decision comes after the petitioner spent approximately three and a half months in jail due to his failure to appear for previous court proceedings. The case, registered under Rajagopalanagar Police Station, involves allegations of planning dacoity and unlawful assembly.
The order, delivered by Judge Sri R. Ravi on January 25, 2023, emphasizes the legal principle that bail can be reconsidered even after a breach of previous bail conditions, provided the court is satisfied with the reasons for non-appearance and the nature of the alleged offenses.
Background of the Case and Allegations
The case against Raghu, identified as Accused No. 1, dates back to an incident on December 26, 2016. According to the prosecution and the charge sheet filed in Crime No. 1127/2016, the petitioner along with other accused individuals had allegedly assembled at a vacant spot near Basappana Katte Gutter at approximately 11:00 a.m.
The Rajagopalanagar Police claimed that the group was armed with deadly weapons and was hatching a plan to commit dacoity by targeting members of the general public passing through the area. Following the investigation, a case was registered under Sections 399 (Making preparation to commit dacoity) and 402 (Assembling for purpose of committing dacoity) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The matter eventually reached the sessions court, where it was registered as SC No. 557/2017.
Legal Journey and the Breach of Bail Conditions
Raghu had originally been granted bail by the court on June 15, 2017. For several years, he reportedly remained compliant with the court’s directions and appeared for hearings regularly. However, his legal troubles intensified when he failed to appear on subsequent hearing dates. Consequently, the court issued a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) against him to secure his presence.
The petitioner was eventually secured through the NBW and remanded to judicial custody, where he remained for over three months before filing the current bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).
Arguments Presented by the Defense
Representing the petitioner, Advocate Sri Narayanaswamy A.B. argued that Raghu is innocent of the charges and was not even aware of the alleged incident. The defense contended that the police had foisted a false case against him primarily for “statistical purposes.”
Regarding the breach of previous bail conditions, the defense explained that Raghu was out of station during the previous hearing dates and was unable to reach the court in time. It was further highlighted that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner for his family and that his dependents were suffering due to his incarceration. The defense also pointed out that the offenses under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC do not carry the death penalty or life imprisonment as punishment.
Prosecution’s Objection
The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail petition, filing formal objections. The state argued that there was a prima facie case against the petitioner based on the materials placed on record. The prosecution expressed concerns that if released, Raghu might abscond again or attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses, thereby hampering the trial which is already in its advanced stages.
Court’s Observations and Ruling
After hearing both sides, Judge Sri R. Ravi evaluated the circumstances. The court noted that the petitioner had indeed been compliant with bail conditions for a long period following his first release in 2017. The court found that the reasons provided for his non-appearance—being out of station—were sufficient to reconsider his liberty, especially given that he had already served over three months in custody since being re-arrested on the warrant.
The court further observed that the nature of the offenses requires a full-fledged trial to determine guilt and that the apprehension of the prosecution regarding the accused absconding could be addressed through stringent conditions. Finding that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for release, the court allowed the petition.
Conditions for Release
The court ordered Raghu alias Dio Raghu to be released on bail subject to the following conditions:
- The petitioner must execute a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with one surety for a like sum.
- He is strictly prohibited from holding any threat to the complainant or tampering with prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
- The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court without obtaining prior permission.
- He must furnish proof of his residential address and that of his surety.
- He is directed not to indulge in any similar types of offenses in the future.
The court explicitly warned that if any of these conditions are violated, the bail order would automatically stand cancelled. This ruling ensures that the trial in SC No. 557/2017 can proceed while the accused is at liberty, provided he strictly adheres to the judicial mandates.