Allowed

Vishesh S/O Ishwargouda Patil v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Nov 2019CRL.P/101808/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a criminal case involving allegations of assault, attempted murder, and undue influence. The court imposed conditions including appearance before the IO, furnishing surety, cooperating with investigation, and not threatening witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in the event of arrest subject to conditions including surrender to IO within 10 days, furnishing bond with sureties, and regular attendance.

Vishesh S/O Ishwargouda Patil Vs the State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.G.M.PATIL

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101808/2019

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

VISHESH S/O ISHWARGOUDA PATIL AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SETTAR COLONY, DHARWAD.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.K.M.SHIRALLI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY VIDYAGIRI POLICE STATION, DHARWAD, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH DHARWAD. (BY SMT.SEEMA SHIVA NAIK, HCGP.)

¶13

... RESPONDENT

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO DIRECT THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER IN CHARGE OF DHARWAD VIDYAGIRI POLICE STATION CRIME NO.116/2019 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 506, 34, 307, 323, 504, 326 OF IPC, AGAINST HIM AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE & CJM, DHARWAD TO RELEASE THIS PETITIONER ON BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST, IN THE SAID CASE.

¶15

¶16

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

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This is an anticipatory bail petition filed

¶19

under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for enlargement of the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.116/2019 of Vidyagiri Police Station, Dharwad for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 307, 323, 504, 326 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶20

It is the case of the prosecution in

¶21

brief that on 16.08.2019 the complainant one Manjunath lodged a complaint with the respondent-police. He has alleged in the complaint that he is the permanent resident of Mummigatti and now he is resident of Silver Arcade, 3^rd cross, Kelgeri road, Dharwad. He is working as Manager in Hamunanth Liquior Shop at Dandeli. About 3-4 years back, when himself

¶22

¶23

and his friend Vishesh Patil had been to marriage function, the said Vishesh Patil behaved indecently with him. In this regard there was quarrel between himself and the said Vishesh Patil. On 15.08.2019 in the night hours after visiting Prithvi Garden Hotel, situated on Kalghatagi Road when he was returning back to his house, the accused persons came in front of his car and stopped him and all the three accused persons abused him in filthy language, when he was getting down from the car, accused Nos.2 and 3 caught hold him and accused No.1 assaulted him twice on his left ribs with knife. The people who came to the spot rescued him. On the basis of his complaint the respondentpolice have registered the case against the accused persons for the aforesaid offences.

¶24

¶25

The petitioner who is arrayed as

¶26

accused No.1 has stated that there is no prima facie case to make out the alleged offences. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or life imprisonment. The alleged incident took place on 15.08.2019 at about 11.15 p.m. However, the complaint was lodged on 16.08.2019 at 4.45 p.m. This creates strong suspicion regarding the alleged incident and assailants. Accused Nos.2 and 3 have already been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the conditions which may be imposed by this Court and also to furnish surety to the satisfaction of the Court.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP.

¶28

¶29

The allegation in the complaint goes to show that the complainant and accused No.1/petitioner herein were known to each other and there was some incident between them about 3-4 years back. The complainant has also stated in the complaint that when he was admitted in SDM Hospital, Hubballi the police had come there and enquired him but he did not file the complaint immediately. It is not disputed that the complainant had sustained simple injuries and now he is discharged from the hospital. It is also admitted that accused Nos.2 and 3 have been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge. It is not disputed that the petitioner is permanent resident of Dharwad City having movable and immovable properties. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or alternatively for imprisonment for life.

¶30

¶31

It is submitted by the learned HCGP that the petitioner is absconding and his custodial interrogation may be necessary for the recovery of the alleged weapon.

¶32

Under these circumstances, this Court

¶33

is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner may be enlarged on anticipatory bail subject to imposing certain conditions including the condition that the petitioner shall appear before the I.O. and his presence shall be treated as ‘in custody’ for the purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act along with other conditions.

¶34

Accordingly, this Court proceed to

¶35

pass the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

The anticipatory bail petition filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The petitioner

¶38

¶39

is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.116/2019 of Vidyagiri police station, Dharwad on the following conditions.

¶40

i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the investigating officer of the concerned police station within 10 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. When he so surrender before the investigating officer, his presence shall be treated as ‘in custody’, for the purpose of section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.

¶41

ii) The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer.

¶42

iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer to complete the

¶43

¶44

investigation and shall also mark his attendance before the SHO of the Vidyagiri police station, Dharwad on every 2^nd and 4^th Sunday of the month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till the final report is filed.

¶45

iv) The petitioner shall not cause any threat to the prosecution witnesses in any manner and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission.

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

Vishesh S/O Ishwargouda Patil v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishesh S/O Ishwargouda Patil 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

Sri.Rakesh @ Rakhi Son of Tayappa Vs State of Karnataka

Vittal S/O Laxmappa Nadagoudra Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Sunil S/O Sidram Kshetri Vs the State of Karnataka

Bharat S/O Nagusa Shinghri Vs the State of Karnataka

Kumar @ Shivakumar S/O Somanna Radder Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri.Siddappa Yallappa Rankanakoppa Vs the State of Karnataka