Allowed

Rajashekar @ Raja v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Mar 2024CRL.P/1035/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the Karnataka High Court granted bail to the accused charged with threatening a judge under Section 506 IPC and the Explosive Substances Act. The court noted the witness depositions and long custody before granting bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail for Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with witnesses and leaving the jurisdiction.

Rajashekar @ Raja Vs the State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:11484 CRL.P No. 1035 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1035 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

RAJASHEKAR @ RAJA S/O SHIVANANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO.40, LINGADAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572101

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SMT. USHA M.S., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

BY HALASURU GATE POLICE STATION, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560001

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. DIWAKARA K. MADDUR, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.137/2021 (CR.NO.168/2020) OF HALASURGATE P.S., BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.506 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3, 4, 5 OF EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT ON THE FILE OF THE LXV ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.

¶18

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

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:11484 CRL.P No. 1035 of 2024

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This is a successive bail petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner/accused in Crime No.168/2020 of Halasurgate Police Station, Halasurgate Sub-Division, Bengaluru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 506 of IPC.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶23

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

¶24

The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution against this petitioner is that he had indulged in causing threat to a Judge that he will blast the car by sending a letter which was got written through his daughter. Hence, the police have investigated the matter and filed the charge-sheet for the offence under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 506 of IPC.

¶25

This petitioner earlier approached this Court in Crl.P.No.7219/2023 and the same was withdrawn and liberty was given to the petitioner to approach this Court after

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:11484 CRL.P No. 1035 of 2024

¶27

examination of C.W.12. In the earlier petition, the petitioner has produced deposition of P.Ws.1 to 9 and this Court had noticed that scribe of the complainant has not been examined and hence, reserved liberty to approach this Court after examination of C.W.12. Now, the learned counsel would submit that C.W.12 has been examined and she has not supported the case of the prosecution.

¶28

Per contra, the learned High Court Government

¶29

Pleader for the respondent-State would submit that C.W.12 is none other than the daughter of this petitioner and normally, the daughter will not support the case of the prosecution and no daughter will give evidence against the father. He would also submit that handwriting expert has not been examined before the Trial Court.

¶30

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State, this Court, earlier having heard the matter directed the learned counsel for the petitioner to place the document of threat letter which is marked as Ex.P2 before the Trial Court. Having considered the contents of the document at

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:11484 CRL.P No. 1035 of 2024

¶33

Ex.P2, it is seen that the said letter is addressed to the concerned Judge, wherein certain reference is made for having sent the same to the Commissioner of Police and also CCB Commissioner and threat is also caused to dismiss the drug case and this threat letter not pertains to any of his case. When such averments are considered, when C.W.12 has also not supported the case of the prosecution and this Court earlier given liberty to approach this Court after examination of C.W.12 and having considered the fact that this petitioner is in custody for more than 3½ years and also considering the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 9 and C.W.12, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., subject to imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:-

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused shall be released on bail in Crime No.168/2020 of Halasurgate Police Station, Halasurgate SubDivision, Bengaluru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 506 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶36

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:11484 CRL.P No. 1035 of 2024

¶37

(i) The petitioner shall execute 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.

¶38

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

¶39

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.

¶40

(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court, till the case registered against him is disposed of.

¶41

(v) The petitioner is directed not to commit the the similar offence in future.

¶42

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 80

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

Rajashekar @ Raja v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajashekar @ Raja 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

Smt Rudramma W/O Late Siddappa Vs Smt Ningamma W/O Late Maligappa

Smt K Ratnamma W/O Veerabhadrappa Vs Sri K Ekanthappa S/O Late Sannakallappa

Smt Jahnavi Vs Smt B Shobha

Sri. Harishith S R Vs State of Karnataka

Rahathulla Vs Shaik Mohammed

Sri. Harshithkumar N v Vs the Authorised Officer Cum Deputy Conservator of Forest