Allowed

Shri. Rajusingh S/O Lalsingh Rajaput v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Oct 2024CRL.P/103022/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the criminal petition filed by accused No. 3 seeking bail in a robbery case. The court held the petitioner was not present at the crime scene and granted bail on the ground of parity with co-accused, dismissing the state's objection regarding the petitioner's residence.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was granted bail on execution of a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000 with one surety for the likesum.

Shri. Rajusingh S/O Lalsingh Rajaput Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15099 CRL.P No. 103022 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

DHARWAD BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 103022 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI. RAJUSINGH S/O LALSINGH RAJAPUT AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS OCC. PVT. SERVICE, R/O.WARD No.7, KALOO AT: KALOO – 334 602 TQ: LUNKARANSAR DISTRICT BIKANER RAJASTHAN STATE NOW AT: HINDALAGA CENTRAL PRISON BELAGAVI – 591 108.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI ASHOK R KALYANASHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA (KITTUR P.S.) BY IT’S STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE HIGH COURT BENCH PREMISES DHARWAD – 580 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SMT. GIRIJA HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.3 ON BAIL ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS DEEMED FIT IN KITTUR P.S. CR.No.131/2024, PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT,

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15099 CRL.P No. 103022 of 2024

¶19

KITTUR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 341, 342 AMD 395 OF IPC AND ETC.,

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SHIVASHANKARAMARANNAVAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) 1. This petition is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C and Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking bail in Crime No.131/2024 of Kittur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 342 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’).

¶24

One Sri.Amit Ashok Periwal has filed the complaint stating that 8-10 days ago, when he had been to Jaipur, his friend Sri.Milan had requested that he is in urgent need of Rs.10,00,000/- and as such, he informed his workers to go to Shivamogga and give Rs.10,00,000/- to Sri.Milan. On 30.06.2024 at about 6:00 am, Sri.Chandanath

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15099 CRL.P No. 103022 of 2024

¶26

Rameshwar Sidh and Sri.Sunil Rajkumar Prajapath took Rs.10,00,000/- and were traveling in a Tata Nexon Car bearing No.ΚΑ-17-ΜΑ-1992 belonging to one Sri.Yakshit Jain to handover the said cash to Sri.Milan. Around 7:00 am, Sri.Chandrakant Sidh called the complainant and informed that he was driving the said vehicle and Sri.Sunil Rajkumar Prajapath was sitting beside him. When they were traveling on BelagaviDharwad Highway, after crossing Kittur, one white colour Innova Crysta overtook them, blocked their way and stopped the vehicle, thereafter, four people got down from the said Innova car, approached towards their vehicle and forcibly got opened the doors, punched them and tied their hands and made them to sit in the second row of the car and drove both the cars to the service road and forcibly took cash of Rs.10,00,000/- and they did not see the number of the car properly. The complainant returned from Jaipur on 01.07.2024 and enquired both the persons about the incident and after consulting his friends, he filed the complaint to the police. The said complaint came to be

¶27

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15099 CRL.P No. 103022 of 2024

¶28

registered in Crime No.131/2024 of Kittur Police Station against six unknown persons for the offences under Sections 341, 342 and 395 of IPC.

¶29

The petitioner came to be arrested on 20.07.2024 and he is in judicial custody. The petitioner filed bail application before the Sessions Court and the same came to be rejected. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking bail.

¶30

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

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that

¶32

the accusation against this petitioner is that he had intimated transportation of cash in a car by two persons to accused No.6, who inturn informed the same to accused No.1. He further submits that the petitioner was not on the spot at the time of the incident. Similarly placed

¶33

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15099 CRL.P No. 103022 of 2024

¶34

accused person namely accused No.4 has been granted bail by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.

¶35

Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that this petitioner who is the co-worker had informed carrying of cash in a Car by two persons who inturn informed the same to the accused persons. She further submits that this petitioner is the resident of Rajasthan. If he is granted bail, he will abscond and he will not available for trial. With this, she prayed to reject the petition.

¶36

Having heard the learned counsels, this Court has perused F.I.R, complaint, remand application and the materials placed on record.

¶37

As per the averments of the complaint, when Sri.Chandanath Rameshwar Sidh and Sri.Sunil Rajkumar Prajapath were carrying cash of Rs.10,00,000/- in a car, another car ie., Innova Crysta overtook them and four persons got down from the Car and forcibly made those

¶38

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15099 CRL.P No. 103022 of 2024

¶39

persons to sit on the back seat of the car and drove the cars on the service road and robbed Rs.10,00,000/-. Considering the said allegation, the petitioner – accused No.3 was not present on the spot at the time of the incident.

¶40

The accusation against the petitioner – accused No.3 is that he is the co-worker under the complainant and he informed carrying of cash in a car by two persons to accused No.6, who inturn informed the same to accused No.1. There is no allegation of the petitioner – accused No.3 being present on the spot at the time of the incident. Accused Nos.4 to 6 who were similarly placed to that of the present petitioner have been granted bail by this Court and therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity. Merely because the petitioner is the resident of Rajasthan, it is not a ground to reject his bail petition.

¶41

¶42

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15099 CRL.P No. 103022 of 2024

¶43

10. Considering all these aspects, the petitioner –

¶44

accused No.3 has made out a ground for grant of bail. In the result, following;

¶45

ORDER

¶46

The petition is allowed . The petitioner – accused No.3 is granted bail in Crime No.131/2024 of Kittur Police

¶47

Station, subject to the following conditions:

¶48

(i) The petitioner – accused No.3 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/(Rupees two lakh only), with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶49

(ii) The petitioner – accused No.3 shall co-operate with the police in further investigation.

¶50

(iii) The petitioner – accused No.3 shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.

¶51

(iv) The petitioner – accused No.3 shall stay in Belagavi District and mark his attendance before the concerned police on every Sunday till filing of the final report.

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15099 CRL.P No. 103022 of 2024

¶53

¶54

(v) The petitioner – accused No.3 shall not leave the Country of India without prior permission of

¶55

the Court concerned.

¶56

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶57

GH List No.: 19 Sl No.: 6

Shri. Rajusingh S/O Lalsingh Rajaput v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Rajusingh S/O Lalsingh Rajaput 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

Mr G Sunil Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Jayanthi Vs State by

Shashikumar M.K @ Prutvi Vs State of Karnataka

Suresh Vs State of Karnataka

Hiralal @ Hiranath S/O Beeyanath Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Jamila W/O Mukhtar Ansari Vs State of Karnataka