AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M G Uma, J
The petitioner - accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.250/2023 of Akkur Police Station, pending in C.C.No.136/2024 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channapatna, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 114 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant - Shrinivasa.
Heard Sri. Nataraj Baba K, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused the materials on record.
In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
“Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”
My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following:
REASONS
The petitioner - accused No.2 is seeking grant of bail. He was apprehended on 11.03.2024 and since then, he is in judicial custody. The father of the deceased child lodged the first information against accused Nos.1 and 2, making specific allegations. After investigation, the charge sheet is filed. Accused No.1 is the wife of the informant and the mother of the deceased child. Since she was having illicit relationship with accused No.2, they were residing separately and both of them conspired to cause the death of the child born in the marriage between the informant and accused No.1. As per the charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer, there is an eyewitness to the incident and it was accused No.1 who took the child and asked accused No.2 go keep watch and ward and prevent others from coming to the spot. It was accused No.1 who said to have thrown the child to the river as a result of which, it died. The specific overt acts causing the death of the child is on accused No.1. Therefore, detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to pre-trial punishment. Considering the nature of the allegations made against the present petitioner, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution.
Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.250/2023 of Akkur Police Station, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:
a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.
b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.
If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.
On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.