SRI RAMESH @ REBEL RAMU v. STATE BY CHITRADURGA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
The petition is allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 307, 323, 504
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. The material on record would go to show that in the alleged incident that had taken place on 27.04.2024, the victim Raghu has suffered only simple injuries. Petitioner is in custody from 27.04.2024. Investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet has been…
- Para 77. The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.95/2024 pending before the Court of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, arising out of Crime No.176/2024 registered by Chitradurga Rural Police Station, Chitradurga, for the offences punishable under…
Judgment
SRI RAMESH @ REBEL RAMU S/O OBANNA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT BOMMENAHALLI VILLAGE CHITRADURGA TLAUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 547. (BY SRI GOPALAKRISHNAMURTHY C, ADV.) AND: STATE BY CHITRADURGA RURAL POLICE STATION REP BY ITS SPP, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU DISTRICT - 560 001. (BY SRI CHANNAPPA EERAPPA, HCGP) …PETITIONER …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 (CHITRADURGA RURAL P.S) TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER IN CR.NO.176/2024 AND THE SAME IS REGISTERED AS S.C.NO.95/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 323,307,504 OF IPC. Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:33298 CRL.P No. 7972 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER
Accused in S.C.No.95/2024 pending before the Court of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, arising out of Crime No.176/2024 registered by Chitradurga Rural Police Station, Chitradurga, for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 307 and 323 of IPC, is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
FIR in Crime No.176/2024 was registered by Chitradurga Rural Police Station, Chitradurga, against the petitioner herein for the aforesaid offences on the basis of the first information dated 27.04.2024 received from Manjamma, who is the wife of injured victim Raghu. During the course of investigation, petitioner was arrested on 27.04.2024. Investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet has been filed. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33298 CRL.P No. 7972 of 2024 Sessions Court was rejected on 24.07.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition has prayed to allow the petition.
Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition.
The material on record would go to show that in the alleged incident that had taken place on 27.04.2024, the victim Raghu has suffered only simple injuries. Petitioner is in custody from 27.04.2024. Investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet has been filed. Undisputedly, petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that he has made out a prima facie case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the following order:-
Operative part
The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.95/2024 pending before the Court of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, arising out of Crime No.176/2024 registered by Chitradurga Rural Police Station, Chitradurga, for the offences punishable under - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:33298 CRL.P No. 7972 of 2024 Sections 504, 307 and 323 of IPC, subject to the following conditions: a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons; c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses; d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future; e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 307, 323, 504.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.