IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.P. Sandesh, J.
MADHU – Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 3985 of 2022
Decided On : 19-05-2022
Bail - Assault - The court allowed the petition for bail in connection with a case registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 307, 504 read with 34 of IPC, subject to certain conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought bail in connection with a case registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 307, 504 read with 34 of IPC, related to an incident where they allegedly assaulted the complainant during a clash over organizing a Volleyball Tournament.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the factual aspects of the case and the circumstances under which the incident took place, allowed the petition for bail subject to certain conditions.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail in connection with the case registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 307, 504 read with 34 of IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the circumstances of the incident, including the clash between two groups and the earlier case registered by the police, and decided to grant bail to the petitioners subject to specific conditions.
Final Decision: The petitioners were allowed bail in connection with the case registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 307, 504 read with 34 of IPC, subject to certain conditions.
JUDGMENT :
H.P. Sandesh, J.
1. This petition is filed under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in respect of Crime No. 92/2022 registered by the Harohalli Police Station, Ramanagara District, for the offences punishable under Ss. 307, 504 read with 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the complainant Sri Narendra filed a complaint that there was a galata between the complainant and these petitioners on 12.03Rs. .2022 in connection with organizing Volleyball Tournament and these petitioners assaulted with iron rod on his abdomen and other parts of the body and injured took the treatment in the hospital. Based on the complaint, the police have registered the case invoking the offences punishable under Ss. 307, 504 read with 34 of IPC.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that when the said incident came to the knowledge of the police, the police have visited the house of the petitioners and the police have also registered the case against the brother-in-law of the petitioner that they have caused threat when they visited the house invoking the offence punishable under Sec. 353 of IPC and subsequently afterthought the present complaint is obtained and case has been registered. The learned counsel has produced the photographs of the Police Inspector along with the complainant to substantiate his contention. The learned counsel submits that the complainant and the Inspector both are hand in glove and earlier crime number was registered at the instance of the police and subsequently this case has been registered. Hence, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that the medical records discloses that the injured took the treatment for a period of ten days with regard to his abdomen injury and the injuries are inflicted with deadly weapon iron rod on vital part and hence the petitioners are not entitled for bail.
6. Having heard the respective learned counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, in terms of Annexure-H, the complaint was given by CHC-422 on 12/3/2022 at 9.00 p.m. and the present complaint is filed on 13/3/2022 at 11.30 a.m. subsequent to the registration of the earlier crime. Having taken note of the factual aspects of the case that clash was taken place between two groups in connection with organizing the Volleyball Tournament and to that effect pamphlets are also placed along with the petition. Having taken note of the circumstances under which the incident was taken place and also taking note of the earlier case was registered by the police and subsequent case has been registered by the police based on the complaint of the complainant one Narendra, it is appropriate to enlarge the petitioners on bail subject to certain conditions.
7. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER:
(i) The petitioners shall surrender themselves before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 (Rupees Two Lakhs only) each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.
(ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and they sh
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the circumstances of the case and may impose specific conditions for the release of the accused.
There is considerable progress in the investigation. So, in the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail on certain conditions.
The court considered the progress in the investigation, the discharge of the injured from the hospital, and the examination of material witnesses as grounds for granting bail to the petitioners.
The main legal point established is that bail can be granted under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. based on the nature of the offences and specific allegations against the petitioner.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the discharge summary from the hospital and the imposition of stringent conditions for granting bail in a case involving serio....
The court's decision was based on the assessment of the nature of injuries, the filing of the charge sheet, and the special powers vested with the court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
The severity of the offense and the prima facie material available on record disentitled the petitioner from obtaining bail.
The court's decision was influenced by the finding that there were sufficient materials to constitute the offence under Sec. 302 of IPC and that the petitioners failed to provide a satisfactory expla....
Bail is permissible even if preventive detention is in force if facts merit grant of relief.
The court's decision was influenced by the gravity of the offence and the fact that the offences were not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.