Amar Sarkar vs J.P. Nagara P.S.

L. Narayana Swamy, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government pleader appearing for the respondent-State. Petitioner is the sole accused in Cr. No. 65/2015 on the file of the respondent - J.P. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. He is in judicial custody and hence he has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

The case of the prosecution is that one Thothendra Jagadevaiah alias Kotesh lodged a complaint before the respondent - Police alleging that two months prior to 26.01.2015 petitioner - accused came along with his wife seeking for job with his brother Sogaiah alias Suresh. He informed that their marriage is love marriage and asked for an accommodation. His brother gave accommodation and job to him. The petitioner - accused gave ID proof when he joined. But on 26.01.2015 at 1.30 p.m. there was quarrel between the couple, but the Complainant, his brother and others pacified them. Thereafter, the petitioner-accused strangulated his wife and escaped from the spot. On the basis of the said complaint the respondent - Police registered a case and took up the investigation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner - accused is innocent and a false case has been registered against him. Reading of complaint does not make out a prima facie case against him for the offence alleged. He contends that the Complainant alleged that one Prabhu had informed that petitioner - accused had killed his wife. But he is not the eye witness to the incident. Even the telephone number of the said Prabhu is not mentioned or it was seized by the prosecution. The Complainant mentioned telephone number as 843123078 stating that it belongs to petitioner - accused. But on enquiry police came to know that it belong to another person and there is no relation between the said person, Complainant and the Prabhu or the petitioner - accused. The investigation is completed and charge sheet has already been filed. He hails from respectable family. He is in judicial custody since 06.02.2015. The petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court while granting the bail. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader vehemently opposes the bail application on the ground that there is a prima facie case against this petitioner - accused. He submits that the offences alleged are very serious and the present petitioner is directly involved in the crime. He contends that there is frequent quarrel between the couple. This offence alleged is grave one and punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The statement of witnesses, PM report, inquest mahazar and other documents clearly show that this petitioner - accused had committed the alleged offence. The prosecution has placed all the relevant documents on record. Therefore, he requests this Court to dismiss the bail application.

Perused the records. As could be seen from the records, the investigation is completed and charge sheet has already been filed. On perusal of the records produced there is no direct evidence to show that this petitioner - accused had committed any offence much less the offence alleged against him. The Complainant had stated that one Prabhu had informed over phone stating that this petitioner - accused strangulated his wife. But the said phone number was not recovered. The phone number mentioned belongs to some other person and there is no nexus between the said Prabhu, Complainant or petitioner - accused. The material placed on record by the prosecution is not sufficient at this stage to hold that the petitioner - accused had killed his wife. The petitioner is in judicial custody for more than six months. Besides, the petitioner - accused hails from a respectable family having deep roots in the society. He undertakes to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court while granting the bail. Thus, the apprehension of the learned Government Pleader could be suitably met by imposing proper conditions. Hence the following:--

The bail petition is allowed. Petitioner is granted bail. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent local surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court, subject to following conditions;

1) He shall not hold out threats to the prosecution witnesses or tamper with evidence;

2) Petitioner shall attend the court on all dates of hearing, except under unavoidable circumstances;

3) It is made clear that if he does not comply with any one of the conditions imposed on him, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail from the concerned Sessions Court.