CRL.P/8813/2016 of SRI RAJESH BANGERA @ ACHU Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 29 December 2016

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel! for the petitioner wno isaccused No.1 and the learned Government Pleader for the.respondent.

2. This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.|seeking regular bail in respect of a case registered againstthe petitioner in Cr.No.74/2016 on the file of respondent -_Police Station. Offences are punishable under Section 399|of IPC and Sections 4 and 25B of Indian Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, during the.course of arguments, has contended that the complainant -_Police Officer has filed a complaint alleging that on.24.07.2016 he received an credible information regarding|unlawful assembly gathered near Sulthan Bathery in.Mangalore carrying some deadly weapons and planning tocommit some offences. Immediately, ne alongwith staff.visited the said place and on seeing them, three persons.

ran away. However, the police apprehended the petitioner|and on enquiry, it was revealed that they were planning to.attack their enemies and also planning to commit ropbery. —The police seized the knife from the petitioner and arrested|the petitioner and produced him before the Court and on.the same day, ne was remanded to judicial custody. It is.further contended by the learned counsel! for the petitionerthat the respondent has lodged a false complaint against.the petitioner. He has further contended that the petitioner|is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by the Court.and hence prays that he be granted anticipatory bail by.allowing the petition.

4. |On the contrary, learned Government Pleadernas venemently opposed the bail petition on the ground,tnat there are prima facie materials against the petitioner.The material on record discioses that the petitioner hadparticipated in the alleged offence by holding deadly.weapons and he was apprehended at the spot. Hence, he.submits that if the bail is granted to the petitioner, ne may.tamper with the prosecution witnesses and hamper the.

investigation and hence requests for dismissal of the bail.petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the|petitioner and learned Government Pleader and on perusalof tne records, it is seen that the complainant on receiving tnecredible informationNad|visitedtheSpot.andapprehended the petitioner and recovered the knife at the.instance of the petitioner. The investigation is completed.and the chargesheet has been filed. Hence, the petitioneris not required for any further investigation. The petitioner|is permanent abode of Baloor Parapu, Mangalore having.roots in the society. He nas undertaken to obey any.conditions imposed on him. Thus, the apprehension of the.learned Government Pleader could be suitably met with, by.imposing certain conditions to safeguard the interest of the.prosecution.

6. In this view of the matter, petition is allowed andbail is granted to the petitioner, subject to the following.conditions:-

ORDER

The petition is allowed. The petitioner shall bereleased on bail in connection with Cr.No.74/2016 of|MangaluruBarke|PoliceStation,onthefollowing.conditions:-

Conclusion

:*The petitioner snall execute a personal.bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees|One Lakh only) with one surety for the)likesum to the satisfaction of the Court of J.M.F.C. III Mangalore in Cr.No./74/2016of C.C.No.3590/2016. —bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees|One Lakh only) with one surety for the)likesum to the satisfaction of the Court of J.M.F.C. III Mangalore in Cr.No./74/2016of C.C.No.3590/2016. —

il)TnepetitionerSnall notindulge|inNampering the investigation and tamper.the prosecution witnesses.Nampering the investigation and tamper.the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The petitioner snall not indulge in criminalactivities.activities.

iv) If the petitioner violates any of the above.conditions,the|bailorderShall automatically stands seized.conditions,the|bailorderShall automatically stands seized.

Sd/-—

JUDGE.