KAKL010022552022

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE

AT KOLAR

PRESENT

Smt. DIVYA P.K., M.A., LL.B.,

I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kolar.

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022

Crl. Misc. No.731 / 2022

PETITIONER : B.M. Manjunath,

S/o Muniyappa, 32 yr.,
R/o Sonnenahalli Village,
Narasapura Hobli,
Kolar Taluk.

(Rep. by Sri. T.R. Jayarama,

Advocate.)
V/S

RESPONDENT : State of Karnataka,

Rep. by PSI,
Gulpet Police Station, Kolar.

(Rep. by Smt. K.S. Jothilakshmi,

Public Prosecutor.)
*****

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438

of Cr.P.C., seeking for anticipatory bail in the event of his
 2

arrest in Crime No.70/2022 of Gulpet Police Station, Kolar,

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 395 &
397 of IPC.

2. Sri. Gowtham is the informant. It is alleged that

on 21.07.2022 at around 11:00 a.m., informant was along
with his friend Shiva Kumar. Sathish (accused No.1) asked
his friend Shiva Kumar over phone to urgently come to
Manighatta Road. As such, Shiva Kumar went to Manighatta
Road along with informant on his Yamaha Fascino motorcycle
KA-07/EE-514. At that time, said Satish (accused No.1)
along with 10-12 members wrongfully restrained them and
accused No.1 asked his associate Kiran (accused No.2) to kill
them and also asked Tarun (accused No.3) to snatch money &
mobile phone from them. Another person asked Harsha
(accused No.4) to snatch motorcycle from them. All of them
threatened informant and his friend Shiva Kumar by
brandishing deadly weapons and with an intention to kill
Shiva Kumar they assaulted on his head causing bleeding
injury. They again attempted to assault on the head of Shiva
Kumar and at that time, Shiva Kumar raised his right hand
and the blow fell on his right hand fingers due to which his
two fingers were chopped off and his left hand was fractured.
Said persons also attempted to commit murder of informant
by assaulting on his right hand & back causing bleeding
injuries. Said persons committed dacoity of cash of `2,300/-
& motorcycle from Shiva Kumar and mobile phone from
 3 Crl. Misc. No.731/2022

informant. By seeing police jeep coming towards them, all of

them ran away from the spot.

3. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that

by virtue of name shown in remand application filed by
respondent police on 05.08.2022 before jurisdictional
Magistrate, police are making hectic attempts to apprehend
petitioner though he is no way concerned or connected to the
alleged crime. Petitioner is innocent and has not committed
any offence. Petitioner is permanent resident of the address
mentioned in the cause title and he is ready & willing to abide
by any of the conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
He thus prays for allowing the petition.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed common

objections in this petition and connected cases by narrating
the facts of the case in brief and has contended that the
allegations made against the petitioner are serious in nature.
It is further contended that petitioner gave shelter to accused
persons after commission of offences. The involvement of
petitioner is also revealed subsequently during investigation.
The informant has sustained grievous injuries and his
condition is serious. The investigation is pending and there is
every possibility that petitioner may tamper with evidence and
threaten the witnesses. He may not make himself available
for further investigation. She thus prays for dismissal of the
petition.
 4

5. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and

learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on
record.

6. The point that arises for consideration is: -

Whether petitioner is entitled for

grant of anticipatory bail under
Section 438 of Cr.P.C?

7. The answer to the above point is in the ‘negative’,

for the following: -

REASONS

8. This Court has carefully gone through the Case

Diary maintained by the police. It is no doubt true that the
allegations made against petitioner are serious in nature. It
is alleged that petitioner along with accused Nos.12 to 14
gave shelter to accused persons after they have committed the
offences alleged against them.

9. Though the first information is registered against

accused Nos.1 to 4 only, investigation has revealed the
involvement of accused Nos.5 to 14 based upon the
confession made by accused No.5 – Nithin.

10. The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that

the investigation is still pending and there is every possibility
that petitioner may tamper with evidence and threaten the
 5 Crl. Misc. No.731/2022

witnesses. The petitioner may also abscond and not make

himself available for further investigation. Accused, who is
absconding, is yet to be traced. The weapons used in the
commission of offence are yet to be recovered from accused
persons along with cash, mobile phones & motorcycle
snatched from informant and his friend. The Test
Identification Parade is yet to be conducted. The Call Detail
Records and the opinion of the Finger Print Expert in respect
of accused Nos.1 to 4 are awaited. The statements of other
relevant circumstantial witnesses are yet to be recorded.
Moreover, as per the objections of learned Public Prosecutor,
injured Shiva Kumar is still under treatment and not yet
recovered. The main accused in this case is still absconding.

11. Harbouring accused persons is heinous offence

and when a person harbours the accused, equal amount of
punishment is imposed upon such person. The person, who
approaches the Court of Law to obtain the privilege of
anticipatory bail, should keep in mind that his conduct must
be fair and he must approach the Court with clean hands.
Further, the person must approach with propriety showing
due respect to the norms laid down by Law. Learned Public
Prosecutor has mainly contended that petitioner along with
accused No.12 gave shelter to accused persons after they
have committed the offences alleged against them and thus
he has not approached the Court with clean hands. At this
stage, if petitioner is enlarged on bail, he will collude with
 6

main accused to tamper the evidence and threaten the

witnesses. Further, the contentions of the petitioner are in
the nature of his defences which are required to be
considered during investigation/trial.

12. This Court has also considered the facts of the

case in the light of principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex
Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal & Others v. State (NCT
of Delhi) & Another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1. Considering
the seriousness of the allegations, prima facie material
available against petitioner and facts & circumstances of the
case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to
exercise discretion under Section of 438 Cr.P.C., to grant
anticipatory bail to petitioner, at this stage.

13. In the result, the Court would pass the following: -

O R D E R

This petition filed by petitioner

under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is rejected.

Dictated to Judgment Writer directly on computer,

computerized by him, revised, corrected by me and then pronounced
in the open Court on this the 18th day of August 2022.

Sd./-
(DIVYA P.K.)
I Addl. Sessions Judge, Kolar.
sd./-*