Partly allowed

Mr Virendra Khanna v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC16 Apr 2021CRL.P/2605/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court relaxed bail conditions by modifying the requirement for the petitioner to mark monthly attendance. The original monthly attendance was exempted, replaced with a quarterly requirement, considering the filed supplementary charge sheet and the petitioner's regular court appearance.

What did the court decide?

Bail condition modified to require the petitioner to mark attendance at the respondent police station once every three months instead of once a month.

Mr Virendra Khanna Vs State of Karnataka by — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

¶5

CRL. P. NO. 2605/2021

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR. VIRENDRA KHANNA, S/O MR. SRI RAM KHANNA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, FLAT NO. 301, SHAMROK APARTMENTS, NO. 10, MOYEKVILLE ROAD, LANGFORD TOWN, BANGALORE-560 054.

¶8

PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI NASIR ALI, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANASWADI POLICE, BANGALORE, INVESTIGAGED BY CCB POLICE, BANGALORE. PIN-560 043.

¶12

RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRIVEERANNA G. TIGADI, S.P.P.)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438/439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO RELAX AND MODIFY THE CONDITION NO. (b)(iv) IMPOSED ON THE PETITIONER IN CRL. P. NO. 6847/2020 & ETC.

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION PERTAINING TO PRINCIPAL BENCH, BENGALURU COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING AT DHARWAD, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

: 2 :

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This petition is filed under Section 439(1)(b) of

¶19

Cr.P.C. seeking relaxation of bail condition no. b(iv) imposed on the petitioner while granting bail to him on 04.01.2021 in Crl. P. No. 6847/2020 in relation to offences registered in Crime No. 588/2018 by Banaswadi Police Station.

¶20

Heard Sri Hasmath Pasha for the petitioner and Sri V.G. Tigadi, Special Public Prosecutor.

¶21

Condition No. b(iv) is as follows:

¶22

He shall also mark his attendance once in a month, on a first Sunday in the first week of every calendar month till filing of supplementary charge sheet and if filed, till conclusion of trial.

¶23

Sri Hasmath Pasha submits that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Delhi. His parents are also living in Delhi. Supplementary charge sheet has also been filed. In view of this it is not necessary to subject the petitioner to the above condition. He is regularly

¶24

: 3 :

¶25

appearing before the trial Court. He finds it difficult to come over to Bengaluru every month from Delhi. Therefore he requests for relaxing the said condition.

¶26

Sri V.G. Tigadi submits that the petitioner is a resident of Bengaluru as can be made out from the address given in the cause title of the petition. Since he is residing in Bengaluru he may not find it difficult to mark his attendance in the Police Station once in a month. He submits that this petition is to be dismissed.

¶27

Having heard both sides, it is to be stated that the petitioner cannot say as to which of the conditions imposed on him should be retained or which of the condition is not necessary to be followed for any reason. Conditions are imposed on an accused while granting bail to see that he regularly appears before the Court during trial and also to see that he shall not involve in any criminal case in future. Imposition of condition is within the discretionary power of the Court. Therefore,

¶28

: 4 :

¶29

merely for the reason that supplementary charge sheet is filed, it cannot be a ground for relaxing the bail condition.

¶30

As has been submitted by Sri Veeranna G. Tigadi, the petitioner is shown to be a resident of Bengaluru. However in para 13 of the petition it is stated that the petitioner’s parents are aged and are residing in Delhi. The petitioner wants to visit his parents at Delhi. For this reason and also taking note of the fact that he is regularly appearing before the trial court on every date of hearing, a lenient view may be taken for relaxing condition No. b(iv). Instead of requiring him to mark his attendance every month, he may be directed to visit the Police Station once in three months. Hence the following order.

¶31

ORDER

¶32

Petition is allowed in part. Condition No. b(iv) in the order dated 04.01.2021 in Crl. P. 6847/2020 is modified and relaxed as below.

¶33

: 5 :

¶34

The petitioner shall mark his attendance in the respondent Police Station once in three months on the first Sunday of the calendar month till conclusion of trial.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

bvv

Mr Virendra Khanna v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Virendra Khanna v. State of Karnataka by

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

Rajakumar Vs State by Sidhlaghatta Town P.S

Pankaj Saw Vs State of Karnataka

Aishwarya School of Nursing Vs the Karnataka State Nursing Council

Raju @ Psyco Pooma Vs State of Karnataka

Ramalakshmamma Vs State by Rayalpad Police Station

M/S Janki Corp. Ltd., Vs Shri. v. Giriyappa S/O. T Obleshappa