Back
2022 Supreme(Kar) 929
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H. P. Sandesh, J.
Khalid - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 7670 of 2021
Decided On : 12-01-2022
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Proceedings
Act Referred
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.34, S.379, S.406, S.420, S.427
PREVENTION OF DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY ACT : S.2
Headnote
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the accused based on the completion of investigation, charge sheet filing, lack of criminal antecedents, and the time spent in custody.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail for offences related to drawing money from an ATM using a screwdriver and other devices.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the investigation was completed, charge sheet filed, and no other criminal antecedents against the petitioner. Considering the time spent in custody, the court granted bail.
Issues: Regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 427 and 379 read with Section 34 of IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The completion of investigation, charge sheet filing, lack of criminal antecedents, and the time spent in custody influenced the court's decision to grant bail.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was released on bail subject to specified conditions.
Sirajuddin Ahmed, Advocate, Krishna Kumar, Advocate
JUDGMENT
H.P. Sandesh, J. - This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner in Crime No.242/2021 of K.R.Puram Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 427 and 379 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that this petitioner as well as Amir Khan both indulged in drawing money using screw driver and other devices drawn an amount of Rs.42,500/- from ATM and petitioner was apprehended on 20.08.2021.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigation is already completed and charge sheet is filed and no other criminal antecedents against this petitioner and considering the gravity of offence, he may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP for State submits that an amount Rs.42,500/- has been recovered at the instance of this petitioner and said amount was stolen from the ATM and when the recovery is made at the instance of this petitioner it is not a fit case for granting bail.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP and also taking note of the gravity of the offence, an amount of Rs.42,500/- is recovered from this petitioner and no other criminal antecedents against this petitioner and also he was apprehended on 20.08.2021 and almost he is in custody from last five months and investigation is completed and charge sheet filed and no need of custodial trial.
In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.1 shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.242/2021 of K.R.Puram Police
Station, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 427 and 379 read with Section 34 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(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.
