Karnataka High Court

Armugam vs The State Of Karnataka on 31 August, 2016

Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

Dated this the 31st day of August, 2016

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SREENIVASE GOWDA

Criminal Petition No.5317/2016

BETWEEN:

1. ARMUGAM
S/O.ANKASETTY
AGED 45 YEARS
AGRICULTURIST
R/AT HOOGYAM VILLAGE
CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK &
DIST - 571 313.

2. NAGESH
S/O.ANKASETTY
AGED 40 YEARS
AGRICULTURIST
R/AT HOOGYAM VILLAGE
CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK &
DIST – 571313 ...PETITIONERS

(By Sri.Y.S.SHIVA PRASAD, Adv.,)

 AND

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY RAMAPURA P.S,
BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BANGALORE - 560 001 ...RESPONDENT

(By Sri.B.VISWESWARAIAH, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.438
CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETRS. ON BAIL
IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.
NO.16/2016 OF RAMAPURA POLICE STATION,
CHAMARAJANAGAR, WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE
OFFENCES P/U/Ss.143, 341, 324, 354, 114 R/W
149 OF IPC. THE ADDL. DIST. AND S.J.,
CHAMARAJANAGAR, SITTING AT KOLLEGALA HAS
DISMISSED THE BAIL PETITION ON 21.6.2016
IN CRL.MISC.NO.5120/2016.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,

THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER
The petitioners have preferred this petition under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. praying to grant them anticipatory bail in connection with
Crime No.16/2016 registered by the respondent-Police for the
offences punishable under Sections 143, 341, 324, 354, 114 r/w
149 IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned
High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused
the FIR, complaint and other papers produced along with the
petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations
against all the accused persons including the petitioners, who are
accused Nos.2 and 3 are similar. Whereas accused Nos.1, 4 to 6
have been granted anticipatory bail on 21.6.2016 in
Crl.Mis.No.5120/2016 by the Sessions Court. Learned Counsel
submits that the petitioners are innocent of the offences. However,
the alleged offences are not punishable either with death or life
imprisonment and they are punishable with imprisonment upto 5
years. Petitioners are prepared to abide by any condition that may
be imposed by the Court while granting them bail. Therefore,
learned counsel prays for allowing the petition by granting
anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the
respondent-Police submits that as there is no serious allegation
against accused No.1 and accused Nos.4, 5 and 6 are ladies, they
have been granted Anticipatory Bail by the Sessions Court in the
aforesaid Crl.Mis.No.5120/2016. Whereas, petitioners who are
accused Nos.2 and 3 are male persons and there are
serious allegations against them. Investigation is still under
process. Therefore, if the petitioners are released on bail, they may
interfere with the investigation and may not extend their co-
operation for further investigation of the crime. They may also try
to tamper the prosecution witnesses. In such an event, it would not
only affect fair trial, but would also cause prejudice to the case of
the prosecution. Therefore, he prays for rejection of the bail
application.
5. Based on the complaint made by one Smt. Savitha, a Criminal
Case in Crime No.16/2016 has been registered by the respondent -
police against 6 accused persons including the petitioners. Case of
the prosecution as could be seen from the FIR is that an ameen of a
Civil Court, Kollegal requested the Complainant to show the
accused persons to effect service of summons on them, the
Complainant noticing accused persons proceeding to their village
at Hugyam Village, Jallipalya Main Road had shown them to the
Court Ameen. Accused persons noticing the same assaulted the
complainant. Allegation against all the accused persons is that they
held the Complainant and assaulted her. It is not the case of the
complainant that accused persons assaulted her with any deadly
weapons. It is also not her case that she has sustained any serious
injuries. It is also not the case of the prosecution that the
Complainant was admitted to the hospital for treatment. Offences
alleged are neither punishable with death or life imprisonment and
they are punishable with imprisonment upto 5 years. Accused
Nos.1 & 4 to 6 against whom some allegations are leveled are
granted anticipatory bail in Crl.Mis.No.5120/2016. Under the
above circumstances, applying the principles of parity, the
petitioners are to be granted Anticipatory Bail. Hence, the
following:-
ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioners are granted
anticipatory bail. The respondent-Police is directed to release the
petitioners in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime
No.16/2016 registered by the Ramapura Police for the offences
punishable under Sections 143, 341, 324, 354, 114 r/w 149 IPC,
subject to the following conditions:-
a) Petitioners shall voluntarily surrender themselves before the
respondent - Police within 5 days from the date of receipt of copy
of this order and shall execute personal bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with two local
sureties, for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned
Investigating Officer.
b) Petitioners as well as the surety shall furnish proof of their
address and identity with photos such as voter identity card, ration
Card, Adhaar Card, DL. Etc., in order to ensure the presence of the
petitioners before the trial court at the time of trial.
c) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and
when they are called upon and extend co-operation for
investigation of the crime.
d) Petitioners shall mark their attendance before the respondent -
Police Station once in fortnight preferably on Sunday between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m, till filing of final report by the respondent - Police.
e) Petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned court
without its prior permission till filing of final report.
f) Petitioners shall appear before the concerned court on all the
future dates of hearing. In the event of disobedience of any of the
above conditions, prosecution is at liberty to move the court for
cancellation of the bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE cp*