AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ashok G.Nijagannavar, J
This petition is filed by petitioner-accused No.2 seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.229/2019 (C.C.
No.1394/2019) registered by the Tavarekere Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 324, 395, 397, 307, 201 of IPC and under Section
27 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959.
The facts briefly stated in the petition are that on the complaint filed by Suresh, S/o Siddaraju, cashier in Shekar Wines Shop, the police have
registered the case. After conducting the investigation a charge sheet has been filed which is numbered as C.C. No.1394/2019 on the file of II
Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Magadi.
After filing of the charge sheet the police officials are making attempts to arrest the petitioner. The bail petition filed before the Sessions Court is
rejected.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the accused petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He was taken into custody
under body warrant in C.C. No.1394/2019 and his voluntary statement has been recorded. In the event of his arrest and detention, the petitioner would
be put to great hardship and injustice.
Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the police have conducted the investigation. The charge sheet records clearly
goes to show the complicity of involvement of the petitioner in commission of the offences. There are no valid grounds for granting anticipatory bail.
Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP, this Court has gone through the charge sheet
records.
It is pertinent to note that the accused petitioner was taken to custody under body warrant in C.C. No.1394/2019 and his voluntary statement was
recorded. The voluntary statement discloses the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offences. At this stage it is needless to make elaborate
discussion about the charge sheet records as the same is not permissible for considering the bail application. It is submitted that the petitioner being
involved in several similar criminal cases he is having criminal antecedents. In the event of granting anticipatory bail he is likely to abscond and also
commit similar offences. The said apprehension of the prosecution cannot be ruled out.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, there are no valid grounds for granting bail. Hence, the following:
ORDER
Criminal petition is rejected.