Vinod v. Prasanna Kumar, Advocates)

(By Shri Shekar, Kumar and Prasanna Kumar, Advocates) AND: ...Petitioner State of Karnataka, By Bannerghatta Police Station, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore, Rep. by the State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bangalore – 560 001. …Respondent (By Shri Satish R. Girji, Government Pleader) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to enlarge the 2 petitioner on bail in Crime No.362/2010 of Bannerghatta Police Station, Bangalore, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 120-B and 114 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. This Criminal Petition coming for orders on this day, the Court made the following: - ORDER The petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.5 in Special Case No.03/2011 on the file of II Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 120-B and 114 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

#2. The contents of the First Information Report disclose only the name of accused Nos.1 and 13. According to the case of the prosecution, during the 3 course of investigation, the complicity of this petitioner and the other accused persons in the commission of the offences was revealed, therefore, the petitioner was apprehended and later subjected to judicial custody. The application filed by the petitioner for bail came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the similarly placed accused Nos.2 to 4, 6 to 11 and 13 have already been granted bail by this Court. Having regard to the materials available on record and the allegations made in the charge sheet, the petitioner stands on the same footing as that of other accused persons who have already been ordered to be enlarged on bail. Therefore, on the principles of parity, this petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

#3. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in Special Case No.03/2011 on the file of II Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, on his executing a personal bond for a sum 4 of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge and subject to further conditions that, i) The petitioner shall not tamper or terrorise the prosecution witnesses in any manner. ii) The petitioner shall appear on all hearing dates before the Trial Court without fail. iv) The petitioner shall not indulge in any acts similar to the one alleged in the case and iv) The petitioner shall mark his attendance in respondent – Police Station, on every Sunday between 10:00 a.m. and 05:00 p.m., till the disposal of the case. Sd/- JUDGE Rsh