Ramesh vs State of Karnataka

Budihal R.B, J.—This petition is filed by petitioner-accused No. 3 under Section 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 alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC and later, after the death of one of the injured, the offence under Section 302 of IPC was also inserted in the case, registered in respondent-police station Crime No. 101/2014

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No. 3 and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments has submitted that at the first instance case was registered against 6 unknown persons and the name of the petitioner is not figured either in the complaint or in the FIR. Though the name of one Ramesh is mentioned that he was also present, but subsequently, during investigation, he has not been treated either as a witness or as an accused, but under the mistaken identity the petitioner has been shown as accused No. 3. Learned counsel has also submitted that the statement of prosecution witnesses does not make out a prima facie case about the involvement of the petitioner-accused No. 3 in the case. Referring to the wound certificate of one Naveen, he has submitted that there is no consistency in the case of the prosecution about the weapon used for committing the alleged offence. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner may be granted with anticipatory bail.

As against this, learned Government Pleader during the course of his arguments has submitted that the eyewitnesses have clearly stated about the involvement of the petitioner. From the date of the alleged incident, petitioner is absconding. Filing of the charge sheet is not a ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. As per the statement of eyewitnesses petitioner has assaulted with a club and now he has to be interrogated and the club has to be seized by the Investigating Officer. Hence, it is submitted that petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.

I have perused the averments made in the bail petition and all other materials produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner along with the petition.

As submitted, name of the petitioner is not mentioned either in the complaint or in the FIR and FIR is also registered against six unknown persons. But subsequently, during investigation petitioner has been arrayed as accused No. 3 in the case. Perusing the statement of witnesses who are said to be eyewitnesses, according to the prosecution case their statements have been recorded after two days of the alleged incident and as per their statement the allegation as against the petitioner is that he assaulted Naveen with club and caused injury. I have also referred to the wound certificate in respect of injured Naveen, wherein the history with regard to the alleged incident shows that assailants were holding blade and stones with which they have assaulted. There is no consistency in the history furnished before the Doctor at the time of treatment and the statement of eyewitnesses, so far as the weapons used in assaulting the injured as well as the deceased.

Petitioner has contended in the petition that there is a false implication, that too on the mistaken identity he has been involved in the case. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioner has undertaken to abide by any conditions to be imposed by the Court. Looking to the materials on record, I am of the opinion that by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner can be admitted to anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC, registered in respondent-police station Crime No. 101/2014, subject to the following conditions:

(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- and furnish one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

(ii) He shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

(iii) He shall make himself available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for.

(iv) He shall appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute personal bond and also surety bond.