A Bengaluru Sessions Court has granted regular bail to a husband and wife duo, Rajanna alias Raja Naik and Smt. Rashmi, who were arrested in connection with a violent assault case in the Peenya police station limits. The order was delivered by Sri Rajesh Karnam K., the LVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, who observed that the victim had been discharged from the hospital and the alleged offenses were not punishable by death or life imprisonment.

The petitioners, Rajanna, 47, and Rashmi, 34, residents of Nelagadaranahalli, were arrayed as Accused No. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 184/2022. The Peenya police had booked them under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Section 341 (wrongful restraint), Section 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), Section 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons), Section 504 (intentional insult), and Section 506 (criminal intimidation) read with Section 34.

The Incident: A Dispute Over a Gas Cylinder

The criminal case was initiated following a complaint lodged by an individual who alleged that the accused couple assaulted him over a dispute involving a gas cylinder. According to the prosecution, the altercation escalated to the point where the complainant sustained injuries that required emergency medical attention. The victim was subsequently shifted to Victoria Hospital for treatment.

Following the incident, the Peenya police conducted an investigation and arrested both Rajanna and Rashmi. They had been in judicial custody since their arrest, prompting them to approach the court for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Arguments for the Defense

Represented by their counsel, Sri V.G. Manjunatha, the petitioners argued that they were innocent of the crimes alleged and had been falsely implicated in the case. The defense emphasized that the victim had already been discharged from Victoria Hospital and that there was no lingering danger to his life.

The counsel further argued that the injuries sustained by the complainant were opined to be simple in nature. Furthermore, the petitioners highlighted their status as permanent residents of Bengaluru with no prior criminal antecedents. They contended that as the primary breadwinners of their family, their continued incarceration would cause undue hardship. The petitioners expressed a total willingness to abide by any conditions imposed by the court and assured that they would not flee the jurisdiction or interfere with the ongoing investigation.

Prosecution Opposes Release

The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application, highlighting that the investigation was still in its nascent stages and the formal charge sheet had not yet been filed. The state argued that there were several eyewitnesses to the incident whose statements were still being recorded by the Investigating Officer.

The prosecution expressed apprehension that if the couple were released on bail, they might use their liberty to tamper with the prosecution witnesses or intimidate the complainant, thereby causing a delay in the conclusion of the investigation. The state also raised concerns regarding the risk of the accused absconding from the court’s jurisdiction before the trial could commence.

The Court’s Observations and Reasoning

Upon reviewing the material placed on record, Judge Rajesh Karnam K. noted that while there were allegations of assault, the gravity of the situation was mitigated by the fact that the victim had recovered and left the hospital. The court observed that the offenses invoked against the couple were not exclusively punishable by death or life imprisonment, which is a significant factor in considering bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.

The court held that the apprehension of the prosecution regarding the tampering of witnesses or the flight risk of the accused could be addressed by imposing stringent conditions rather than continued detention. The judge found it appropriate to exercise judicial discretion in favor of the petitioners, noting their readiness to cooperate with the legal process.

Terms and Conditions of the Bail

The court allowed the petition and ordered the release of Rajanna and Rashmi on regular bail upon the execution of a personal bond for Rs. 50,000 each. Additionally, the court required a cash surety of Rs. 5,000 each and the following conditions:

1. The petitioners must appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days of the receipt of the order.
2. They are strictly prohibited from tampering with any prosecution witnesses, either directly or indirectly.
3. They must appear regularly before the 31st ACMM Court without fail.
4. They shall not abscond from their residence and must furnish their current address proof to the Peenya police.
5. They are forbidden from involving themselves in any other criminal activities while out on bail.
6. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.

The judge clarified that if any of these conditions are violated, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to move the court for the immediate cancellation of the bail. The order ensures that the accused are granted their liberty while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.