SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU
RAKESH S – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P 6132/2020



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRL. P. NO. 6132/2020

BETWEEN:

RAKESH. S, S/O SONNAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,

C/O RADHAKRISHNA, 4TH CROSS,

GANDHIPURA, WHITEFIELD,

BENGALURU, PIN 560 066.

-

PETITIONER

(BY SRI UDAYAKUMAR B.A., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

VARTHUR POLICE STATION,

BENGALURU-560 098,

REPRESENTED BY

STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT COMPLEX,

BENGALURU-560 001.

-

RESPONDENT

(BY SRI VINAYAK V.S., H.C.G.P.)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF

CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL

IN CRIME NO. 144/2020 OF VARTHUR POLICE STATION,

BENGALURU

REGISTERED

FOR

THE

OFFENCES

PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 341, 326, 307 R/W 34 OF

IPC & ETC.

: 2 :

THIS

CRIMINAL

PETITION

PERTAINING

TO

PRINCIPAL

BENCH,

BENGALURU

COMING

ON

FOR

ORDERS

THROUGH

VIDEO

CONFERENCING

AT

DHARWAD,

THIS

DAY,

THE

COURT

MADE

THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Heard

petitioner’s

counsel

and

the

learned

H.C.G.P.

2.

This is a petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

by accused No.3 in Crime No. 144/2020 registered by

Varthur Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences

punishable under Section 341, 326, 307 r/w Sec. 34

IPC.

3.

The allegations are that all the accused wanted to

cause the death of CW2 as the latter did not agree for

selling the sites to them in the layout formed by him for

a lesser price. Therefore, on 04.07.2020 at about 6.00

p.m., all the accused stood near a school waiting for the

arrival of CW2. At about 8.15 p.m. when CW2 Narayan

Reddy was returning to his house, he was attacked and

assaulted, as a result, CW2 suffered severe injuries.

: 3 :

4.

Investigation is over. Learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that accused No.4 has been enlarged

on bail already, he refers to the order passed by the co-

ordinate Bench in Crl. P. No. 4108/2020.

5.

Learned H.C.G.P. submits that parity will not be

applicable as in the charge sheet specific overt acts are

not attributed to accused No.4.

6.

I have gone through the order passed by this

Court in Crl. P. No. 4108/2020. I find it difficult to

apply the rule of parity for enlarging petitioner on bail.

However, having regard to the fact that investigation is

over and that the injured has been discharged from the

hospital and also fact that he is a student, bail can be

granted. To secure his presence before the Court

during trial, he may be subjected to stringent

conditions. Hence, the following order.

: 4 :

ORDER

Bail petition filed u/s 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the

petitioner-accused NJo.3 is allowed. He shall be

enlarged on bail in Crime No. 144/2020 registered by

Varthur Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences

punishable under Section 341, 326, 307 r/w Sec. 34

IPC. The petitioner is subjected to following conditions.

1.

The petitioner shall be released on bail on

obtaining from him a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-

and two sureties for the likesum to the

satisfaction of the trial Court;

2.

He shall not threaten the witnesses and destroy

the evidence in whatsoever manner;

3.

He shall regularly appear before the trial Court

till conclusion of trial.

4.

He shall mark his attendance once in a

fortnight, on a Sunday in between 9.00 a.m.

and 12.00 noon till conclusion of trial.

SD/-

JUDGE

bvv

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top