Allowed

Yogesh v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC17 Apr 2023CRL.P/1901/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. sought bail for two accused in a case involving robbery, snatching, and extortion. The High Court permitted bail on ₹1 lakh personal bond with two sureties, imposing six stringent conditions including attendance and non-tampering with witnesses, ruling that custody was unnecessary under abundant facts.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on ₹1 lakh personal bond with two sureties; conditions include regular attendance, no tampering, no jurisdiction exit without permission, and submission to I.A. call.

Yogesh Vs State of Karnataka by — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CRL.P No. 1901 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1901 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

YOGESH, S/O PURUSHOTHAM, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, R/A NO.5/1, 9TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, CHAMARAJAPETE, BENGALURU - 560 018.

¶9

DHANUSH, S/O N J RAVISHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/A NO.20, SB ROAD, V V PURAM, BENGALURU - 560 004.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI. SRINIVASA GOWDA K, ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO, V V PURAM PS, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY GOVT. PLEADER, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. VINAYAKA V S, HCGP)

¶17

¶18

CRL.P No. 1901 of 2023

¶19

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE CR.NO.164/2022 REGISTERED VISHVESHWARAPURAM POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 384, 385, 506, 120(B), 364)A) R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF 24TH ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.

¶20

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

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Heard Sri. Srinivasa Gowda K., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Vinayaka V.S., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

¶23

Present petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:

¶24

“ WHEREFORE , the petitioners (Accused No.1 & 2) above named humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to enlarge them on bail in Cr.No.164/2022 registered in V.V. Puram Police Station for alleged offence punishable under Sections 384, 385, 506, 120(B), 364(A) R/w 34 of IPC, now pending on the file of 24th Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in the interest of justice."

¶25

¶26

CRL.P No. 1901 of 2023

¶27

The brief facts of the case are as under:

¶28

A student by name Kaushik S/o. Gunadhar lodged a complaint with Vishveshwarapuram Police Station on 30.12.2022 which was registered in Crime No.164/2022 initially for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 385 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’ for short) against unknown persons.

¶29

Gist of the complaint averments reveals that at about 1.45 p.m. on 29.12.2022, near the college of the complainant four persons came into two wheeler and picked the complainant stating that they need to have discussion with him and took him near nice road and all of a sudden assaulted him on his face and snatched away his gold chain and locket and also got transferred Rs.24,000/- online and then brought him to Vishveshwarapuram and took him to the Indian Bank ATM and drew Rs.20,000/- cash from the ATM with the ATM card belonging to his mother and also gave life threat.

¶30

Police after registering the case, arrested the petitioners and investigation is continued.

¶31

4 - CRL.P No. 1901 of 2023

¶32

Petitioners were sent to judicial custody. The

¶33

attempt made by the petitioners to obtain an order of grant of bail was turned down by the LV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCC-56) in Crl. Misc. No.1614/2023 by order dated 27.02.2023. Thereafter, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶34

Sri. Srinivasa Gowda K., learned counsel for the petitioners reiterating the grounds urged in the bail petition vehemently contended that the allegations of showing the nude photographs of the female students etc. are all against the other absconding accused and from the custody of the present petitioner only two wheeler and sum of Rs.3,500/- has been recovered and they are in custody since 16.02.2022 and the first petitioner is suffering from severe medical problems and therefore, sought for grant of bail.

¶35

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes for grant of bail.

¶36

In the light of the rival contentions, this Court perused the materials on record meticulously.

¶37

5 - CRL.P No. 1901 of 2023

¶38

On such perusal of the materials on record, it is seen that the seizure of two wheeler and cash has already taken place from the custody of the petitioners.

¶39

The fact remains that the present petitioners are not strangers to the complainant and the complainant has gone with the company of the present petitioners and other accused persons.

¶40

Whether at all, the petitioners are involved in snatching away the gold chain and locket and cash to the tune of Rs.20,000/- or not cannot be decided by this Court at this stage.

¶41

Prosecution has also invoked the offence punishable under Section 364A of IPC. The other accused persons are yet to be arrested.

¶42

Under such circumstances, continuation of the accused petitioners in judicial custody having regard to the abundant facts of the case, is unnecessary.

¶43

¶44

CRL.P No. 1901 of 2023

¶45

15. The apprehension expressed by the prosecution can

¶46

be met with by imposing stringent and suitable conditions. Accordingly, this Court passes the following:

¶47

O R D E R

¶48

The Criminal Petition is allowed .

¶49

Each of the petitioners-accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;

¶50

Petitioners shall attend the Court regularly;

¶51

Petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly/indirectly;

¶52

Petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of Bengaluru District without prior permission;

¶53

Petitioners shall not indulge in similar activities.

¶54

Petitioners shall not threaten the prosecution witnesses.

¶55

Petitioners shall mark their attendance before the Investigating Agency on every third Sunday

¶56

¶57

CRL.P No. 1901 of 2023

¶58

between 10.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. till the trial is concluded.

¶59

If any of the above conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of this bail order.

¶60

Ordered accordingly.

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70 CT: BHK

Yogesh v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh 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

Sri. Srinivasa Vs State by Srinivasapura Police Station

Mahadeva Vs State of Karnataka

Mahadeva N @ Chinnu Vs State by Vidyaranyapuram Police

Sri Darshan S Vs the State of Karnataka

Rakesh C. M. @ Rakesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Sheharaj @ Sheru Vs State of Karnataka