Allowed

Nagesh K E v. State by Arasikere Police Station

Karnataka HC27 Jan 2022CRL.P/146/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court allowed the petitioner's bail petition under Section 438 CrPC for an alleged offence of robbery and mischief, granting bail subject to surrender and other standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon arrest in the event of the crime specified, subject to execution of bail bond with sureties and compliance with specific conditions.

Nagesh K E Vs State by Arasikere Police Station — Anticipatory Bail | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.146/2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

NAGESH K.E., S/O EROBANNA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT KANNIVENAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT 561202. ...PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI PRASANNA RAO R, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

STATE BY ARASIKERE POLICE STATION, REP.BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560001. ...RESPONDENT

¶11

(BY SRI K.K. KRISHNA KUMAR, HCGP)

¶12

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.17/2021 OF ARASIKERE P.S., TUMAKURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 392, 448 OF IPC 1860 PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE COURT OF PCJ AND JMFC, AT PAVAGADA IN C.C.NO.1033/2021.

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in respect of Crime No.17/2021 registered by the Arasikere Police Station, Tumakuru, for the offence punishable under Sections 392 and 448 of IPC.

¶17

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

¶18

The factual matrix of the case is that in the complaint an allegation is made that a person came and knocked the door of the house of the complainant and after opening the door, he barged inside the house and snatched the gold chain weighing 38 grams worth of Rs.1,20,000/- and he was red handedly apprehended by public and later, on registration of the case, accused No.1 revealed the name of the petitioner that he came along with him and hence this petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.2.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶20

the petitioner did not enter the house of the complainant and

¶21

¶22

snatch the gold chain. Only based on the statement of the coaccused, he has been arraigned as an accused and recovery is made at the instance of accused No.1 and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case.

¶23

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that the petitioner also accompanied accused No.1, who barged into the house of the complainant and the matter is under investigation and hence his presence is required.

¶24

Having heard the respective learned counsel and also on perusal of the material on record, it discloses that only based on the statement of the co-accused, who has been red handedly apprehended by general public, revealed the name of the petitioner and the recovery is made at the instance of accused No.1 and there are no any criminal antecedents against this petitioner and also taking note of the complaint, allegation is made against only one person. When such being the case, whether the petitioner indulged with accused No.1 or not is a matter of investigation and this Court can direct him to assist the Investigating Officer and co-operate for investigation.

¶25

¶26

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

¶27

following:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.17/2021 registered by the Arasikere Police Station, Tumakuru, for the offence punishable under Sections 392 and 448 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶30

(i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.

¶31

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶32

(iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission till the disposal of the case.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Nagesh K E v. State by Arasikere Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagesh K E v. State by Arasikere Police Station

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

Venkatesh R @ Mathi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Vignesh Vs State of Karnataka

Seema @ Shawar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Uday Periyaswamy Bhaskar Vs State by Rajajinagar Police

Nayaz Ahmed Vs State of Karnataka

Riyaz Pasha @ Illiyas @ Illu Vs the State of Karnataka