Allowed

Sri Jeevan v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2024CRL.P/5162/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench allowed bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to three petitioners involved in a riot and affray case. Noting they were not charged with 302 IPC and only simple injuries were alleged, court ordered enlargement on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail with bond of Rs. 2,00,000 and two sureties each, subject to conditions against committing offences, tampering witnesses and appearing when required.

Sri Jeevan Vs State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:37475 CRL.P No. 5162 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5162 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI JEEVAN S/O SURESH, AGED ABOUT 20 YRS, STUDYING II YEAR, BBA, BANMAIAH'S COLLEGE, MYSURU R/AT HANUMANALU VILLAGE, BANNUR HOBLI, T NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSORE - 571 101.

¶8

Digitally signed by REKHA R

¶9

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

SRI RANJAN GOWDA @ RAJU S/O SURESH, AGED ABOUT 18 YRS, GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIQUE, COLLEGE STUDENT, MALAVALLI, MANDYA R/AT HANUMANALU VILLAGE, BANNUR HOBLI, T NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT. MYSORE - 571 101.

¶11

SRI RAMESH S/O HOMBEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

¶12

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:37475 CRL.P No. 5162 of 2024

¶13

R/A HANUMANALU VILLAGE, BANNUR HOBLI T NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. GOUTHAM M.,ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANNUR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HONBLE COURT, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶18

…RESPONDENT

¶19

(BY SRI. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.106/2024 REGISTERED BANNUR POLICE STATION, MYSURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 327, 504, 307 AND 302 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC COURT, T.NARASIPURA, MYSURU.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:37475 CRL.P No. 5162 of 2024

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petitioners being accused Nos.12, 11 and 9 as per the charge sheet are before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.106/2024 of Bannur Police Station, initially registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 327, 504 and 307 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Sri.H.M.Mahadeva. After filing charge sheet, Section 302 of I.P.C was added.

¶26

Heard Sri.Goutham M, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Smt.N.Anitha, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials placed on record.

¶27

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:37475 CRL.P No. 5162 of 2024

¶29

“Whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶30

My answer to the above point is in the ‘Affirmative’ for the following:

¶31

R E A S O N S

¶32

The petitioners were apprehended on

¶33

12.04.2024 and since then they are in judicial custody. The FIR was registered against accused Nos.1 to 12. After investigation, the charge sheet is filed, according to which, it was accused Nos.1 to 3 who were charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C, while accused Nos.4 to 12 are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 504 and 506 r/w Section 149 of I.P.C. Specific allegations are made against accused Nos.11 and 12 that they have committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C.

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:37475 CRL.P No. 5162 of 2024

¶35

It is alleged that these petitioners have

¶36

assaulted the injured with a wooden log. The wound certificates pertaining to the injured CWs-3, 4 and 5 disclose that they have sustained simple injuries. It is pertinent to note that the prosecution is not alleging that these petitioners have committed the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. Admittedly, the investigation is completed and the charge sheet is also filed. Therefore, detention of the petitioners in custody would amount to infringement of their right to life and liberty. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions which will take care of the interest of prosecution.

¶37

6. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

The petition is allowed.

¶40

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:37475 CRL.P No. 5162 of 2024

¶41

The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.106/2024 of Bannur Police Station on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶42

a). The petitioners shall not commit similar offences.

¶43

b). The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶44

c). The petitioners shall appear before the Court as and when required.

¶45

If in case, the petitioners violate any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.

¶46

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioners, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioners and the

¶47

¶48

NC: 2024:KHC:37475 CRL.P No. 5162 of 2024

¶49

sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioners on bail.

¶50

Sd/(M G UMA) JUDGE

¶51

RR List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1

Sri Jeevan v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Jeevan v. 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

Sri. Sampangi Reddy Vs Sri.Nagaraju Hanumantharao Nittur

Dr. Rajanna Vs Ssm College of Nursing

M/S Ashatara Laboratories Vs Sri M a Makhandar

Smt. M .S Uma Maheshwari Vs Sri. Thiruvengadathan

Sri M Rajesh Palani Vs Sri Shylendra

Gopal Patnayak Vs State by