Allowed

Mr Dhanush Bhandary @ Dhanu Kanduka v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Nov 2024CRL.P/9052/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.1 sought regular bail in a robbery case where injury to complainant was simple and only a mobile and knife were recovered at his instance. The court held pendency of other cases alone is not a ground to refuse bail and enlarged the petitioner on conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in S.C.No.39/2024 on personal bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions including non-tampering with witnesses and attendance on all hearing dates.

Mr Dhanush Bhandary @ Dhanu Kanduka Vs State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:44700 CRL.P No. 9052 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9052 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR DHANUSH BHANDARY @ DHANU KANDUKA, S/O LATE HARISH BHANDARY, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.2-72, CHOWTA COMPOUND, VIDYANAGAR, KULAI, MANGALURU 575 019.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. VIKRAM RAJ A., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH URWA POLICE STATION, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDITIONAL SPP)

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) PRAYING THIS COURT TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.39/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 394, 397 R/W 34 OF IPC, WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE HONBLE III ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MANGALORE.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:44700 CRL.P No. 9052 of 2024

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional SPP appearing for the respondent-State.

¶24

This petition is filed by accused No.1 and the specific overt-act allegation made against him is that he inflicted injury to the complainant with knife and snatched the mobile and recovery is also made at the instance of this petitioner i.e., knife and mobile. The allegation against accused No.2 is that vehicle was recovered at his instance and this Court has already granted bail in favour of accused No.2 in Crl.P.No.3537/2024 dated 16.05.2024. The learned counsel submits that though number of cases are registered against the present petitioner, in two cases he has already been acquitted and other cases are pending.

¶25

Per contra, the learned Additional SPP appearing for the respondent-State submits that though injury is simple in nature, the petitioner involved in eight cases and those cases are from 2012 to 2024. Having taken note of Crime No.107/2015, the offence invoked against him is Section 302 of IPC and the learned counsel submits that he has already been

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:44700 CRL.P No. 9052 of 2024

¶27

acquitted and in Crime No.45/2021 also he has been acquitted. In Crime No.46/2022, the offence invoked is Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and also Arms Act and he has been enlarged on bail, but he had indulged in committing similar offences and he is a habitual offender.

¶28

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional SPP appearing for the respondentState, the allegation made against this petitioner in Crime No.7/2024 is that he had indulged in committing the offence punishable under Sections 394, 395 read with Section 34 of IPC and the material discloses that only mobile and knife are recovered at his instance. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the nature of injury and injury is simple in nature i.e., contusion. This Court has already exercised discretion in favour of accused No.2 and recovery against him is motorcycle. In the case on hand, mobile and knife are seized and having taken note of the gravity of the offence and the nature of injuries, though the petitioner has indulged in other offences, he has already been acquitted in few cases and other cases are pending and mere pendency of other cases is not a ground to dismiss the bail petition having considered the allegation of assault with knife and injury is

¶29

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:44700 CRL.P No. 9052 of 2024

¶30

simple in nature and hence, this Court can enlarge the petitioner on bail with certain conditions.

¶31

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

¶32

following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with S.C.No.39/2024 (Crime No.7/2024) of Urva Police Station, Mangalore, for the offence punishable under Sections 394, 397 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶35

(i) The petitioner 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.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

(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.

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:44700 CRL.P No. 9052 of 2024

¶40

(v) If the petitioner indulges in committing of similar offences in future, the State is given liberty to approach this Court for cancellation of bail.

¶41

Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

¶42

MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59

Mr Dhanush Bhandary @ Dhanu Kanduka v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Dhanush Bhandary @ Dhanu Kanduka 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 Shivu Vs the Union of India

Sri Ashwathappa Vs Smt N Radha @ Radhamma

M/S Vaswani Whitefield Projects (P) Ltd. Vs K C Rajaram

Sri. Chandrashekaraiah T B Vs Nil

Sri. L. Roopeash Vs Nil

Kendanayaka Vs the State of Karnataka