High CourtsSingle Bench

Suhel Baig @ Babu vs State By Halsurgate P.S., Bengaluru

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 8 February 2022 · Citation: (2022) 02 KAR CK 0027

HON’BLE JUDGES
H.P. Sandesh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 307
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 41 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

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

26 paragraphs · 471 words

H.P. Sandesh, J

1.

This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner/accused No.7 in Crime No.225/2021 of Halasurgate Police

Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 307 read with Section 34 of IPC.

2.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/State.

3.

The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that, this petitioner is the receiver of the subject matter of dacoity of gold ornaments weighing 1

Kg 644 grams and the same is also recovered at the instance of this petitioner and he had indulged in shifting the accused, who has committed the

dacoity.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he is in custody from 30.11.2021. The investigation has been completed and filed

the charge-sheet and no need of custodial trial. The allegation against this petitioner is that he is only a receiver of the subject matter of the dacoity of

gold ornaments and recovery already been made and no need of custodial trial.

5.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/State does not disputes the fact that he is the receiver of the

articles and recoveries are also made at the instance of this petitioner.

6.

Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for the State and on perusal of the material available on record, the allegation against this petitioner is that he is the receiver, the recovery

was also made and no need of custodial trial and he is in custody from 30.11.2021. When such being the factual aspects of the case and the

investigation has already been completed and filed the charge-sheet, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., subject to

imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:-

ORDER

The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.7 shall be released on bail in Crime No.225/2021 of Halasurgate Police Station,

Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 307 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the

satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.

(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court, till the case registered against him is disposed

of.