AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 707 wordsH.S. Kempanna, J.—Petitioner who is arrayed as Accused No. 2 in SC No. 114/2013 on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Mangalore, registered for the offences punishable u/Ss. 143, 147, 148, 307, 324, 427, 504, 506 read with 149 of IPC is before this court praying for enlarging him on bail pending disposal of the trial in the said Sessions Case. It is the case of the prosecution that on 22.1.2011 at about 11.30 p.m., this petitioner along with ten others formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons, like talwars, rods near Kallakatte of Bajal Village, coming within the jurisdiction of Mangalore Rural Police Station and in furtherance of the common object of their unlawful assembly, they ransacked - the complainant''s shop by breaking the empty cool drinks bottles apart from causing damage to the door of his shop and further at that time when one Shakeel and Abdul Razzak came to the said place, the accused are alleged to have assaulted them with weapons with which they were armed and caused them severe injuries and also left the place by threatening with dire consequences.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been arrested on 27.04.2013 and since then he is in custody. His application for bail has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge solely on the ground that he is involved in other cases registered for heinous offences. He submits that he has already been enlarged on bail in all those cases including the case which has been registered for the offence punishable u/S. 302 of IPC. He further submits, in this very case, this petitioner had been granted anticipatory bail by the jurisdictional Sessions Judge. This petitioner was arrested in connection with case registered for the offence punishable u/S. 302 of IPC and therefore he could not appear in the present case. Subsequently, he was shown as arrested in this case also on 27.04.2013. Since he had been granted anticipatory bail in this very case during the pendency of the investigation and as he has already been enlarged on bail in all other cases that has been registered against him including the case registered for the offence punishable u/S. 302 of IPC and as injuries alleged to have been caused on the two victims, viz., Shakeel and Abdul Razzak are simple in nature as per the medical certificate placed on record and as he is in custody since 27.04.2013, he be released on bail.
Learned Government Pleader vehemently opposes the application and contends, having regard to the cases that have been registered against the petitioner, it indicates that he is a habitual offender and if he is enlarged on bail, there is likelihood of he tampering with the prosecution witnesses and also absconding from taking his trial and therefore the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.
Though the material now on record reveals that the petitioner had been granted anticipatory bail in this very case at the stage of investigation by the jurisdictional Sessions Judge, he was arrested by getting him under body warrant in connection with the case registered u/S. 302 of IPC. Subsequently, he is shown as arrested in this case also. He has been granted relief of bail in all other cases which has been registered against him. Taking all these aspects into consideration, coupled with the fact that two injured have sustained only simple injuries as per the medical certificate placed on record, there is no reason to decline the request of the petitioner for bail subject to imposing stringent conditions on him. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Criminal Petition is allowed.
(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing personal bond in a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety for like-sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge subject to the following conditions:
(a) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
(b) He shall attend to the court on all the dates of hearing.
(c) He shall mark his attendance before the Mangalore Rural Police Station on every Sunday between 11 a.m. and 3 p.m. till the conclusion of the trial in this case.
