Allowed

Shri.Sanjay @ Nanu S/O Chandrakanth Patarkar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Jun 2019CRL.P/100747/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a bail petition filed under Section 439 CrPC for an accused involved in robbery, attempted murder, and arms offences. Relying on parity with other released accused and the absence of life/death penalties, the Court ordered bail subject to stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail subject to executing a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000 with sureties, monthly attendance, and not tampering with evidence.

Shri.Sanjay @ Nanu S/O Chandrakanth Patarkar Vs the State… — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JUNE 2019

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100747 OF 2019

¶5

BETWEEN

¶6

SHRI.SANJAY @ NANU S/O CHANDRAKANTH PATARKAR AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE R/O: PARALI VAIJANATH, TQ: PARALI, DIST: BEED, STATE: MAHARASHTRA. ...PETITIONER

¶7

(BY SRI. HARSHAWARDHAN M. PATIL, ADVOCATE) A N D

¶8

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY B.C. NIPPANI P.S., REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH. ...RESPONDENT

¶9

(BY SMT. SEEMA SHIVA NAIK, HCGP)

¶10

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL INSOFAR PETITIONER IS CONCERNED IN NIPPANI BASHVESHWAR CRIME NO.84/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE VII-ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI SITTING AT CHIKKODI REGISTERED FOR THE

¶11

: 2 :

¶12

OFFENCES U/S 454, 380, 397, 307, 332, 352 OF IPC & 25(1)(A), 27(2) OF THE ARMS ACT, 1959.

¶13

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This petition has been filed by the

¶16

petitioner/accused No.4 under Section 439 of the Code

¶17

of Criminal Procedure to release him on bail in connection with Crime No.84/2017 of Basaweshwar Chowk Police Station, Nippani Circle, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 454, 380, 397, 307, 332 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 25(1)(A) and 27(2) of the Arms Act.

¶18

I have heard the learned counsel for the

¶19

petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

¶20

The gist of the complaint is that on 24.08.2017, at about 14.15 hours, the

¶21

: 3 :

¶22

petitioner/accused No.4, along with other accused persons, came in a Mahindra Scorpio Vehicle bearing registration No.MH-19/BU-5459, entered the house of one Jagadeesh by opening the lock by using a screw driver and ‘pakad’ and thereafter they robbed a silver plate and cash from the treasury. When the police tried to stop them, the petitioner/accused No.4 and other accused persons assaulted the police and restrained them from discharging their duties. On the basis of the said complaint, a case has been registered.

¶23

It is the submission of the learned counsel for

¶24

the petitioner/accused No.4 that the petitioner/accused No.4 is innocent and he is not involved in the alleged crime. It is his further submission that already accused Nos.1 to 3 have been released on bail and on the ground of parity, this petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. He further submitted that already chargesheet has been filed and the petitioner/accused No.4 is not

¶25

: 4 :

¶26

required for further investigation or interrogation; the recovery of pistol is at the instance of accused No.1; from the possession of petitioner/accused No.4 only a blunt screw driver and ‘pakad’ has been recovered and no amount is recovered from him; the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life; the petitioner/accused No.4 is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and is also ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner on bail.

¶27

Per contra, the learned High Court

¶28

Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused No.4, along with other accused persons, have robbed the house of one Jagadeesh when he was not in the house by breaking open the lock. She further submitted that there is prima facie material as against the petitioner/accused No.4 for having involved in the said crime and if he released on

¶29

: 5 :

¶30

him, he may again indulge in similar type of criminal activities and he may not be available for trial. On these grounds, she prayed to dismiss the petition.

¶31

I have carefully and cautiously considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.

¶32

As could be seen from the records, already

¶33

chargesheet has been filed. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Whether the petitioner/accused No.4 is involved in the alleged crime or not is a matter which requires to be considered and appreciated only at the time of trial. The recovery which has been made shows that only a screw driver and a ‘pakad’ has been recovered from the possession of the accused. The records also indicate that accused Nos.1 to 3 have been released on bail by the VII Additional District

¶34

and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, Sitting at Chikodi. Under the facts and circumstances, on the ground of parity, the

¶35

: 6 :

¶36

petitioner/accused No.4 is entitled to be enlarged on bail. There are no criminal antecedents that have been alleged against the petitioner/accused No.4 and also no documents have been produced in this behalf. Under the facts and circumstances, I feel that if the

¶37

petitioner/accused No.4 is ordered to be enlarged on bail, by imposing some stringent conditions, the same would meet the ends of justice.

¶38

In the light of the above discussion, the

¶39

petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused No.4 is ordered to be released on bail, in connection with Crime No.84/2017 of Basaweshwar Chowk Police Station,

¶40

Nippani Circle, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 454, 380, 397, 307, 332 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 25(1)(A) and 27(2) of the Arms Act, subject to following conditions:

¶41

(a) the petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court;

¶42

: 7 :

¶43

(b) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly;

¶44

¶45

(d) he shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission; and

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

Kms

Shri.Sanjay @ Nanu S/O Chandrakanth Patarkar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri.Sanjay @ Nanu S/O Chandrakanth Patarkar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Karnataka Vs Mohammad Rafiq S/O Moulasab Nadaf

The Mahalingapur Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Vs Husainsab S/O Abdulsab Raichur

State of Karnataka Vs Smt.Fatimabi M. Shaikh D/O M.A. Shaikh

Govindreddi S/O Rangappa Jayi Vs the State of Karnataka

Ashok Kalkappa Rampur Vs State of Karnataka

Smt.Satyavva W/O Bhimappa Byli Vs the State of Karnataka