Bengaluru, October 4, 2023 – The LXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH 70), has granted regular bail to Bhaskar, a 21-year-old resident of Sunkadakatte, in connection with a case involving attempt to murder, assault, criminal intimidation, and charges under the Arms Act. The order, delivered by Sri. Balagopalakrishna, C/c of the 69th Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, allows the petitioner, Bhaskar, to be released on bail in Crime No. 276/2023 of the Rajgopalanagar Police Station.
The bail petition, Crl.Misc.No.8491/2023, was filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking release from judicial custody. Bhaskar is accused of offenses punishable under Sections 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (Criminal intimidation), 307 (Attempt to murder), 323 (Voluntarily causing hurt) read with 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 25-1(B)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959.
Allegations and Defense
The case was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by an individual named Tousif. The complaint alleges that on July 27, 2023, around 11:00 PM, two unknown persons arrived at the complainant’s shop on a two-wheeler. They reportedly abused and assaulted the complainant with their hands and a ‘long’ (a local term often referring to a sharp-edged weapon or a large stick, depending on context), causing injuries and threatening him with dire consequences before leaving the spot. The police subsequently identified and arrested the petitioner, Bhaskar, in connection with the incident.
In his defense, Bhaskar, represented by his counsel, Sri. Manjunatha Swamy, asserted his innocence, arguing he was falsely implicated with malafide intention. The petition highlighted several points in favor of granting bail:
- The petitioner’s custodial interrogation was no longer required, as indicated in the remand application.
- The complainant was not admitted to any hospital for serious injuries, challenging the severity of the alleged assault.
- There was a delay of four days in lodging the First Information Report (FIR).
- Bhaskar claims to be the only earning member of his respectable family, with no previous convictions or bad antecedents.
- He is a permanent resident of the address specified and is ready to comply with any terms and conditions imposed by the court.
Prosecution’s Objections
The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea, filing objections arguing that the alleged offenses were grave, involving an attempt to commit murder by assaulting the victim on a vital part of the body with a weapon. The prosecution expressed apprehension that if released on bail, Bhaskar might commit similar offenses, tamper with evidence, or abscond, making it difficult to secure his presence for the ongoing investigation and trial.
Judicial Reasoning and Ruling
The Court carefully considered the submissions from both sides and the material available on record, which included the FIR and the complaint. The key point of contention was the allegation that the accused, allegedly angered because the complainant had warned him and his friend about roaming in front of the shop, abused and assaulted the complainant with a ‘long’.
Citing the well-established legal doctrine laid down by the Supreme Court of India in cases like State of Rajasthan vs. Balchand @ Baliay, the Court reaffirmed that “bail is a rule and jail is an exception.” This doctrine, it noted, safeguards the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The Court found that there were no sufficient exceptional reasons to keep the petitioner in judicial custody by rejecting the bail application. It observed that the question of whether the accused committed the alleged offenses would be determined only at the time of the trial. Crucially, the court noted that the presence of the accused was no longer necessary for the investigation. Furthermore, the Court was swayed by the fact that the co-accused in the same case had already been enlarged on bail by the same court, which strengthened the petitioner’s claim for parity.
The Court concluded that the apprehension of the Prosecution regarding flight or tampering could be adequately addressed by imposing strict conditions on the petitioner. Finding it a fit case to grant bail, the Court answered Point No. 1 (whether the petitioner has made out grounds to grant regular bail) in the affirmative.
Conditions for Release
Granting the petition, the Court ordered Bhaskar to be released on regular bail upon executing his personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one solvent surety for the likesum.
The bail is subject to the following mandatory conditions:
- The petitioner shall not tamper with the Prosecution witnesses, either directly or indirectly, in any manner.
- He shall appear before the Investigating Officer (IO) as and when required and shall appear before the court regularly.
- He shall not abscond from his residence and must furnish his address proof to the concerned police.
- He shall not involve himself in any kind of offense in the future.
- He shall mark his attendance at the respondent police station between 10:00 AM and 6:00 PM once in 15 days until the filing of the charge sheet.
The order concluded that Bhaskar shall be released on bail provided his custody is not required in any other case.