Parashuram vs State Of Karnataka

Rajendra Badamikar, J

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439(1)(b) of Code of Criminal Procedure for relaxation of Condition Nos.1 and 4 imposed by the

learned I Addl. Sessions Judge, Vijayapur in Crl.Misc.No.435/2021 vide order dated 16.04.2021.

The present petitioner was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC'). The allegation of the

prosecution that the present petitioner has caused the death of deceased- Shakuntala and he was prosecuted in Crime No.169/2020 for the offence

punishable under Section 302 of IPC by Indi Rural Police, Vijayapur. The petitioner has filed petition seeking regular bail before the I Addl. Sessions

Court, Vijayapur, in Crl.Misc.No.435/2021. The learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 16.04.2021, allowed the petition by imposing as many as five

conditions. The condition Nos.1 and 4 which are now being sought to be relaxed, reads as under:-

Accused/petitioner is enlarged on bail in Cr.No.169/2020 of Indi Rural PS connected to SC No.46/2021 pending before IV Addl. Dist. & Sessions

Judge, Vijayapura for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 of IPC, on execution of self bond for Rs.2,00,000/- and two solvent sureties like

sum to the satisfaction of the concerned court along with solvency certificate on the following conditions :

xxx xxx

Property offered for surety shall be free from all encumbrances.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that these condition Nos.1 and 4 are too harsh and because of these conditions, the petitioner is

unable to get the benefit of bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge. Hence, he has sought for relaxation of condition Nos.1 and 4, regarding solvent

sureties and encumbrance certificate.

The learned High Court Government Pleader did not dispute the conditions imposed but he submitted that since the offence incorporated is under

Section 302 of IPC, stringent conditions were imposed and hence, prayed for the rejection of petition.

It is settled principle of law that while granting the bail the court shall not impose harsh conditions which virtually deny the fruits of the bail order to

the petitioner/accused. In the instant case, the petitioner has been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge but the condition No.1 imposed is

regarding furnishing two solvent sureties and considering the prevailing pandemic, it is very difficult for obtaining the solvency certificates. Hence,

condition No.1 needs to be modified. However, the learned Magistrate is at liberty to ascertain genuineness of the concerned documents produced by

the sureties for verification.

As regards condition No.4, regarding the property offered by sureties, free from all encumbrances certificate cannot be relaxed as it amounts to

virtually giving authority to petitioner to offer a surety, who is already encumbered his property which amounts to releasing the petitioner without

surety. Under these circumstances, the condition no.1 alone needs to be modified.

Accordingly, the condition No.1 is modified to the effect that instead of furnishing two solvent sureties petitioner is directed to furnish two sound

sureties to the satisfaction of the concerned court and the concerned court shall not insist for solvency certificate but, however ascertain the

genuineness of the documents through prosecution, before accepting the said documents.

However, the prayer for relaxation of condition no.4 stands rejected.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed off.