In a notable judicial order passed on April 5, 2024, the LXVI Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-67), Shri Hemanth Kumar C.R., B.A.L., LL.B. (holding concurrent charge), allowed the regular bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3044/2024. The court enlarged Manoj N. (Accused) on regular bail in connection with Crime No. 21/2024 registered by the S.R. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru. The petitioner was facing prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 504 (intentional insult), 506 (criminal intimidation), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons), and 307 (attempt to murder) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Factual Matrix and Prosecution Allegations

The criminal proceedings originated from a complaint lodged regarding an incident that occurred on the night of March 3, 2024, at approximately 1:45 AM.

According to the complainant:

• The complainant and his friends (including Nishanth L., Harshavardhan, Vadivelu, Sendil M., Manjunatha, and Kishan) visited Mohan Bar situated on RRMR Road, S.R. Nagar, Bengaluru, for lunch and drinks.
• While at the cashier counter, Harshavardhan accidentally stepped on the leg of a customer, leading to a brief verbal altercation before both groups separated.
• Later, while the complainant’s group was seated on the first floor of Mohan Bar, individuals identified as Santhosh @ Mule, Stalin, and associates approached them, initiating a fight, hurling unparliamentary abuses, questioning their local origins, and threatening to kill them.
• As the group exited the first floor, a physical fight broke out during which the accused group assaulted Nishanth L.
• It was alleged that Manoj N. arrived holding a long weapon (“long”), which Santhosh grabbed from Manoj’s hand to strike Nishanth L. Nishanth raised his left arm to shield himself, suffering a severe gash and bleeding injuries extending from his forearm to his elbow before the group managed to flee. Nishanth was subsequently shifted to a hospital for treatment.

The details of the petitioner as per court records are:

• Manoj N. (Petitioner / Accused): Aged about 24 years, son of Nagaraj, residing at No. 11, Near Ganesh Temple, 4th Main, 7th Cross, Sampangiramanagar, Bengaluru.

Arguments Advanced on Behalf of the Petitioner

Appearing on behalf of the applicant, learned advocate Sri DGSK presented several grounds seeking regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.:

• Absence of Specific Overt Act: The defence submitted that even as per the FIR narrative, the petitioner did not launch the strike that injured Nishanth L. The prosecution’s own case stated that co-accused Santhosh grabbed the weapon and inflicted the blow, showing no specific overt act of attempt to murder attributed directly to Manoj N.
• Non-Grievous Injury & Discharge: The defence produced medical discharge summary records showing that the injured person (Nishanth L.) received medical treatment and was discharged from the hospital, proving the injuries were not life-threatening.
• Lack of Police Custody Demand: The petitioner had been remanded to judicial custody immediately following arrest and was not taken into police custody for custodial interrogation, signaling that his physical presence was no longer required for recovery or investigation.
• Roots in Society and Undertaking: The applicant is a 24-year-old permanent resident of Sampangiramanagar, Bengaluru, with fixed residential abodes, and promised to abide by all court conditions and participate in trial proceedings.

Objections Raised by the Prosecution

The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the grant of regular bail, filing a formal statement of objections:

• Gravity of Offence: The prosecution emphasized that wielding a deadly weapon (“long”) in a public bar and launching a group attack causing severe bleeding injuries constitutes a grave offence under Section 307 IPC.
• Active Investigation: The prosecution argued that the police investigation was still underway, expressing concern that if released on bail prior to charge-sheet filing, the accused might intimidate prosecution witnesses, destroy physical evidence, or abscond.

Judicial Findings and Detailed Legal Reasoning

The Sessions Court evaluated the complaint, FIR entries, medical discharge summary records, and rival submissions to determine Point No. 1: whether the petitioner made out sufficient grounds for regular bail.

1. Extent of Overt Act and Investigative Need

Judge Hemanth Kumar C.R. observed that while the incident involved a street brawl with dangerous weapons, the petitioner was in judicial custody from the date of arrest, and the investigating agency had not sought police custody for further interrogation or recovery.

2. Medical Status of Injured and Nature of Penalties

The court noted that the injured victim, Nishanth L., had been discharged from the hospital and was out of danger. The court emphasized that whether the bar altercation and weapon possession established the specific mens rea required under Section 307 IPC or constituted a lesser offence under Sections 324 or 326 IPC was a matter to be proven during trial.

3. Protection Against Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention

Holding that the petitioner is a local resident of Bengaluru with a verified address, the court resolved Point No. 1 in the affirmative. The court concluded that prosecution concerns regarding witness interference or trial evasion could be safeguarded by imposing strict conditions—including mandatory attendance and prohibition against committing further offences.

It remains a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that an order deciding a bail application is procedural in nature and does not constitute an expression on the ultimate guilt or innocence of the accused, which remains subject to trial.

Final Order and Imposed Conditions

Answering Point No. 1 in the affirmative, LXVI Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge Shri Hemanth Kumar C.R. allowed the petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and passed the following order:

The petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No. 21/2024 registered by the S.R. Nagar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, 324, and 307 read with Section 34 IPC, on execution of a personal bond for ₹1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum, subject to the following conditions:

1. The petitioner shall appear before the court on all dates of hearing.
2. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called upon for the purpose of further investigation.
3. The petitioner shall not involve himself in any criminal activities.
4. The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence and shall not threaten, induce, or allure prosecution witnesses in whatsoever manner.
5. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission of the court.
6. The petitioner shall produce permanent address proof documents.