SALMAN S/O MARDAN ALI, & ORS. vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH MANNAEKHELLI POLICE STATION

These petitions are filed by the petitioner/accused Nos.1 to 4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail in Crime No.153/2016 of Manna Ekhelli Police Station, Bidar, registered for the offences punishable under Section 364A & 342 of IPC and also under Section 17 of POCSO Act, 2012.

Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, on 07.12.2016 complainant Shakeelmiya lodged a complaint alleging that at about 2:54 p.m. the complainant received a call to his mobile No.9740210507 from the mobile No.7846054473 informing that his son had been kidnapped, then calling person told the complainant to pay Rs.15,00,000/-. It is further alleged that the complainant after some time, once again received a call from the same mobile asking as to whether his name is Khaleelmiyan, then asked to pay Rs.15,00,000/- as his son has been kidnapped. After returning to the house, complainant discussed with his family members, his wife thereafter proceeded to the school, there he saw the bicycle and bag of his son, then, from one person who was sweeping in the school, he collected the mobile number of the school teacher and called to his mobile. On calling the teacher told him that a lady had came to the school, she wanted to meet his son, for which, the teacher told to meet the said lady and thereafter he has not seen his son in the school. The complainant after enquiry with the relatives and after search, when his son was not traced, he lodged a complaint. On the basis of complaint, a case has been registered against accused-petitioners.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State.

The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners are that earlier complaint was registered against unknown persons. Subsequently the names of the accused-petitioners incorporated during the course of investigation. It is further contended that accused-petitioners are near relatives of the complainant and there is dispute regarding money transaction between them. Therefore, a false case has been foisted against the petitioners and others. Even though there is demand for ransom of Rs.15,00,000/- and without payment and without their being harass the boy has been released. There is no overt act for the purpose of said amount by the accused persons. He has further contended that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and if the petitioners are released on bail, they are ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and they are ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.

On the contrary, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State vehemently contended that the statement of boy has been recorded by the Prl.JMFC, Humnabad, whereunder he has clearly stated the overt acts of each of the persons who have kidnapped him and confined in a house, there because of his efforts he has come out of the room and thereafter called the father and he has come back to his house. He has further contended that still the investigation is in progress and accused- petitioners are highly influenceable persons, at this juncture, if the accused-petitioners are released on bail, there is likelihood of they being absconded and they may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

I have gone through the copy of the FIR, complaint and other material produced along with the petition. As could be seen from the complaint, it reveals that a minor boy has been kidnapped for ransom of Rs.15,00,000/- and a phone call also has been received by the complainant to that effect and thereafter the search has been made and in spite of search, the boy was not found, as such the complaint came to be filed. It is the specific contention of accused Nos.1 and 3 that the complainant is the relative, there is dispute regarding money transaction between them, therefore, a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. By going through the record, even though the provisions of Section 17 of POCSO Act has been mentioned, but neither in the complaint nor in any other material the ingredients of any of the offences covering under POCSO Act, has been mentioned. As such, there is no prima facie case made out by the prosecution against the accused persons in respect of POCSO Act. On perusal of the material it indicates that the said complaint has been filed without there being any material to substantiate the fact that the accused-petitioners kidnapped the son of the complainant for ransom of Rs.15,00,000/- and as such, he has been detained in a house and thereafter they have released him. If really they have kidnapped a boy for ransom of Rs.15,00,000/-, then, definitely they could have detained the boy and they could have insisted for the said amount, thereafter they could have released the boy after the receipt of the amount. There is no specific overt act against each of the accused persons in this behalf. Apart from this, the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and when the accused-petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties, under such circumstances, if accused- petitioners are released on bail, by imposing some stringent conditions, it would meet the ends of justice.

For the aforementioned reasons, the petitions are allowed and petitioner/accused Nos.1 to 4 are ordered to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:

i) The petitioners shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) each with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses;

iii) The petitioners shall make themselves available to the Investigating Officer as and when required;

iv) The petitioners shall mark their attendance before the Investigating Officer once in fortnight till the charge sheet is filed;

v) The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.