1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1742/2020

BETWEEN:

MANJUNATH

S/O. DEVARAJU

AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS

R/AT MADAL PURA VILLAGE

DINDIGANAHALLI HOBLI

C.R. PATNA TALUK

HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. JAGADEESH H.T, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ARSIKERE TOWN

POLICE STATION

ARSIKERE-573 103

REPRESENTED BY

STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BENGALURU-560 001

… RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. R.D. RENUKARADHYA, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438

OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN

THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.281/2014 REGISTERED BY

2

ARASIKERE TOWN POLICE STATION, HASSAN FOR THE OFFENCE

PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 379 OF IPC. THE PRINCIPAL

SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN HAS DISMISSED THE BAIL PETITION

ON 03.10.2019 IN CRL.MISC.NO.1061/2019.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS

DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C,

praying to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail in

the event of his arrest in respect of Crime No.281/2014

(C.C.No.232/2018 pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge

& JMFC., Arasikere) of Arasikere Town Police Station, for an

offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the

respondent/State.

3.

The factual matrix of the case is that, the

complainant in the complaint alleged that on 16.12.2014,

he had parked his motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-

13-W-9913 in front of the office of Forest Department at

3

Arasikere

to

visit

the

Arasikere

Town

Agricultural

Department. When he came back at around 4’o clock, he

did not found his motorcycle, where he parked. Hence, he

lodged a complaint. Based on the complaint police have

registered a case against the unknown persons for an

offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC. However, this

petitioner was apprehended in connection with offence

punishable under Section 397 of IPC at Bengaluru and

motorcycle worth of Rs.30,000/- was recovered.

4.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would contend that accused No.2 has been enlarged on bail

in Crl.P.No.3024/2019 vide order dated 13.08.2019 and this

petitioner is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

He further contends that the investigation has been

completed and motorcycle has already been recovered.

Hence, he prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on

bail.

4

5.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the State would contend that the

vehicle was stolen in the year 2014 and this petitioner

again involved in the similar offence in the year 2017 and

recovery was made at the instance of this petitioner only.

Hence, there is a prima facie case against this petitioner

also and he is not entitled for bail.

6.

Having heard the arguments of learned counsel

for the petitioner and also the learned High Court

Government Pleader appearing for the State, this Court has

to examine as to whether this petitioner has made out a

ground to invoke Section 438 of Cr.P.C, to enlarge him on

bail in the event of his arrest.

7.

Having taken note of the fact that the vehicle

was stolen in the year 2014, the same was recovered and

this petitioner was also involved in another crime. No

doubt, there are two cases against this petitioner, one in

5

respect of this crime and another in respect of offence

under Section 397 of IPC. This Court has granted bail in

favour of other accused and the prosecution has also not

placed any material before the Court to show whether, he is

a habitual offender or not. Taking into consideration the fact

that the recovery has already been made and