Allowed

Mr Vikas v. State by Chennamanakere Achukattu Police Station

Karnataka HC18 Aug 2022CRL.P/4574/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner, accused No.6, in a criminal matter involving offences under Sections 323, 324, 307 and 149 IPC. The court released him on personal bond with sureties, restricting him from tampering with witnesses and leaving the jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on Rs. 2 lakh personal bond and two sureties for same sum, subject to conditions of not tampering with witnesses and not leaving jurisdiction.

Mr Vikas Vs State by Chennamanakere Achukattu Police… — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4574/2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR. VIKAS S/O. SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT. 106, 7^TH MAIN, 7^TH CROSS, SREE RAMANAGARA, BANASHANKARI, 3^RD STAGE, BANGALORE - 560085

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. NANDEESHA G., ADVOCATE (THROUGH VC))

¶10

AND:

¶11

STATE BY CHENNAMANAKERE ACHUKATTU POLICE STATION, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR RESPONDENT (THROUGH VC))

¶14

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR. NO.46/2013 OF CHANNAMANAKERE ACHUKATTU P.S., BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 34, 323, 149, 307, 326 OF IPC PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE II ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.7003/2019.

¶15

¶16

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

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Heard the petitioner counsel and also the learned counsel for the State.

¶19

The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that, this petitioner who has been arrayed as accused No.6 and the offences under Sections 323, 326, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC are invoked.

¶20

The counsel appearing for the petitioner would submits that, earlier the petitioner was granted with anticipatory bail and subsequent to the filing of the charge-sheet, no summons was served on the petitioner and directly issued NBW and no information with regard to the filing of the charge-sheet and now this petitioner is in custody and he may be enlarged on bail.

¶21

¶22

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the

¶23

State also not disputes the fact that, after the filing of the charge-sheet, NBW was issued and NBW was not executed and subsequently split up case was registered against this petitioner.

¶24

Having heard the respective counsel

¶25

submissions and also on perusal of the order-sheet, which is filed by the petitioner counsel, it is clear that after the filing of the charge-sheet directly issued NBW against this petitioner who has been arrayed as accused No.6 along with other accused Nos.1, 5 and 9 and subsequently the case was split up and when such being the material on record and when there was no any service of summons against the accused when he was on anticipatory bail and also on perusal of the chargesheet material, no specific overt act allegation is made against this petitioner and hence, it is appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail with conditions:

¶26

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.6 shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.46/2013 of Channammanakere Achukattu Police Station, Bengaluru City, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 307 read with Section45 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶29

(i) The petitioner/accused No.6 shall execute his 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 jurisdictional Court.

¶30

(ii) The petitioner/accused No.6 shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶31

(iii) The petitioner/accused No.6 shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.

¶32

(iv) The petitioner/accused No.6 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior

¶33

¶34

permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.

¶35

(v) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial Court in disposal of the matter, since this is the old matter pertaining to Crime No.46/2013 and in view of the split up charge-sheet is filed, the same is registered as C.C.No.7003/2019.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

Svh

Mr Vikas v. State by Chennamanakere Achukattu Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Vikas v. State by Chennamanakere Achukattu 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

The Icici Lombard General Insurance Co.Ltd., Vs K Saiman S/O. Kondayya

Smt Laxmibai W/O Dattatraya Suvarna Vs Sri Allappa

The Branch Manager Vs Laxmi W/O Late Kumarswamy

Mr Joswin Lobo Vs State of Karnataka

Mahesh Vs the State of Karnataka by

Umesh N Vs State of Karnataka