Karnataka High Court
Shri Nagaraj S/O Babu Pawar vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 July, 2023
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:6774
CRL.P No. 101289 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101289 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SHRI. NAGARAJ S/O. BABU PAWAR,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: ANCHATGERI, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD -580024.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. HANAMANT R. LATUR, AND;
SRI. ROHIT N. LATUR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
R/BY BELAGAVI RAILWAY P.S.,
TQ/DIST: BELAGAVI -590001,
R/BY HCGP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
CHANDRASHEKAR DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.
LAXMAN ...RESPONDENT
KATTIMANI
(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)
Digitally signed by THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
CHANDRASHEKAR OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI 06.02.2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE IXTH ADDL. DISTRICT
Date: 2023.07.10 AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI IN CRL.MISC NO. 74/2023
11:22:59 -0700
REJECTING THE BAIL APPLICATION FILED U/SEC. 439 OF
CR.P.C. FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 395 OF IPC IN RELATION
TO BELAGAVI RAILWAY PS CR. NO. 17/2009 AND RELEASE
THE PETITIONER ON BAIL./ACCUSED NO.6.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:6774
CRL.P No. 101289 of 2023
ORDER
Heard Sri.Rohit N Latur, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent - State.
2. This petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:
"To set aside the order dated 06.02.2023
passed by the Hon'ble IXTH Addl. District and
Sessions Judge, Belagavi in Crl.Misc No. 74/2023
rejecting the bail application filed U/sec. 439 of
Cr.P.C. for the offence P/u/sec. 395 of IPC in
relation to Belagavi Railway PS Cr. No. 17/2009
and release the petitioner/accused No.6 on bail"
3. Brief facts of the case are as under:
Petitioner - accused has been charge sheeted for the
offences punishable under Section 395 of IPC. In fact, the
present petitioner is facing the trial as a split up accused
as the trial with regard to accused No.1 to 5 and 7 to 9
had already ended in acquittal. The petitioner did not
appear before the Court when the trial with regard to
remaining accused being conducted in S.C.No.339/2009
and therefore investigation officer filed split up charge
NC: 2023:KHC-D:6774
CRL.P No. 101289 of 2023
sheet. Accused has been arrested on 15.11.2022 and sent
to judicial custody.
4. The attempt made by the petitioner to obtain
an order of grant of bail is rejected by the learned District
Judge. Thereafter, the petitioner is before this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating
the grounds urged in the petitioner, vehemently contended
that since the main case has ended in acquittal with
regard to the co-accused persons and in the absence of
any recovery and criminal antecedents insofar as present
petitioner is concerned, he is entitled to be enlarged on
bail.
6. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader opposes the bail grounds by contending that the
petitioner was not available to the trial in
S.C.No.339/2009 and therefore split up charge sheet came
to be filed which shows the conduct of the petitioner in not
NC: 2023:KHC-D:6774
CRL.P No. 101289 of 2023
available to the process of law and therefore he should not
be enlarged on bail.
7. Perused the material on record meticulously in
view of the rival contentions of the parties.
8. On such perusal of the material, it is seen that
the petitioner is shown as accused No.6 in respect of
Crime No.17/2009. In the charge sheet materials, there is
no material to show that any of the robbed articles are
recovered from the custody of the present petitioner.
However, according to him he did not receive any
summons from the concerned Court and therefore he
could not appear before the Court in respect of Crime
No.17/2009 which was ultimately tried in
S.C.No.339/2009.
9. Taking note of fact that the present petitioner is
not having any criminal antecedents and there is no
recovery from the custody of the petitioner and also taking
note of the fact that the other co-accused have been
NC: 2023:KHC-D:6774
CRL.P No. 101289 of 2023
acquitted in S.C.No.339/2009 and State having not
preferred any appeal against the said judgment, this Court
is of the considered opinion that the petitioner can be
enlarged on bail.
10. The other apprehensions expressed by the
prosecution can be met with by imposing suitable stringent
conditions. Accordingly, this Court passes the following:
ORDER
1. The Criminal Petition is allowed.
2. Petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on executing
a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for
the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
3. Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper
the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
4. Petitioner shall attend the Court regularly.
5. Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of
Belagavi District without prior permission.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:6774
CRL.P No. 101289 of 2023
6. Petitioner shall not indulge himself in similar
offences.
If any of the above conditions are violated, the
prosecution is at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail
order.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SH
