Gopi vs The State

Budihal R.B., J.—This is the petition filed by the petitioner-accused No. 6 u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 r/w. Section 149 of IPC registered by the respondent-police in Crime No. 152/2012.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No. 6 and also learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no overt act by the present petitioner. Hence, he is entitled to be granted with bail. Counsel made the submission that now the investigation of the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, he can be admitted to bail. He also made the submission that accused No. 5 has already been granted with bail by the order of the Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No. 115/2012 on the file of the FTC-X at Bangalore.

As against this, learned High Court Government Pleader during the course of his argument submitted that regarding the presence of the present petitioner at the spot there are" witnesses CW''s-2, 3, 4, and 5 have spoken about his presence and he also made the submission that looking to the CCTV footage, the presence of the petitioner at the spot can be seen. Hence, he submitted that petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail.

I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint, order passed by the lower Court on the bail application and other charge sheet material produced by the petitioner along with the petition. Perusing the averments in the complaint and also even statement of witnesses CW''s-2 to 5, it is to the effect that even the present petitioner and accused No. 5 were present and they were keeping watch at the time of the alleged incident. Except this, there are no other allegations made in the complaint or stated by the witnesses in their statement about any overt-act of assault made on the deceased. Looking to the allegations it is only against accused Nos. 1 to 4 and even looking to the investigating materials, the weapons have been seized at the instance of accused Nos. 1 to 4 and nothing further is to be seized from the present petitioner. Therefore, looking to all these materials on record and as accused No. 5, who is also similarly placed has been already granted with bail by the Sessions Court, I am of opinion that by imposing reasonable conditions to secure the presence of the petitioner-accused No. 6 either before the Investigating Officer or before the concerned Court, he can be admitted to bail.

Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to release the petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 r/w. Section 149 of IPC registered by the respondent-police in Crime No. 152/2012, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court;

(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) The petitioner shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for; and

(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court within thirty days from the date of this order and execute the personal bond and also the surety bond.