AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S Vishwajith Shetty, J
Petitioner is before this Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail in C.C.No.32/2023 pending before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, T.Narasipura, for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 465, 471 IPC, Rules 42 & 44 of KMMC Rules and Sections 4(1), 4 (1A) and 21 (1) of the MMDR Act, 1957.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to filing of private Complaint in C.C.No.32/2023, FIR in Crime No.321/2016 was registered against the petitioner on the same facts and in the said case, the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.4142/2017 on 07.11.2017. Subsequently, private complaint was filed against the petitioner before the Trial Court and after taking cognizance against the petitioner, summons was not issued to the petitioner. Petitioner was never served with summons at any stage. Inspite of the same, NBW was issued against the petitioner and thereafter, proclamation order was also issued. Therefore, prays to allow the petition.
Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the bail application and submits that inspite of repeated summons to the petitioner before the trial Court, the presence of the petitioner could not be secured. Therefore, the proclamation was issued against the petitioner. Hence prays for dismissal of the petition.
On perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that prior to filing of Private Complaint in C.C.No.32/2023, FIR was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.321/2016 by T.Narasipura Police Station, on the basis of first information received from Somashekhar, Senior Geologist, Mysuru. The same is also mentioned in the private complaint filled subsequently in the year 2019. After filling of the private complaint, the case was registered against the petitioner before the trial Court in C.C.No.32/2023 and summons was not issued to the petitioner. However, the order sheet of the Trial Court would show that without issuing summons to the petitioner, the trial Court had proceeded to issue NBW against the petitioner and even though the NBW issued to the petitioner was not executed, the trial Court has issued proclamation order against the petitioner. The records would go to show that petitioner was not issued summons by the trial Court at any stage and coercive steps have been taken against him including issuance of NBW and proclamation order. The maximum punishment for the alleged offences is imprisonment for period of 5 years.
It is not in dispute that this Court has granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the very same case i.e., Crime No.321/2016 in Crl.P.No.4142/2017 disposed on 07.11.2017. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that, petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in C.C.No.32/2023 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, T.Narasipura, for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 465, 471 IPC, Rules 42 & 44 of KMMC Rules, and Sections 4(1), 4 (1A) and 21 (1) of the MMDR Act 1957, subject to the following conditions:
a) Petitioner shall appear before the trial Court within fifteen days from today and shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the trial Court;
b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the trial Court and Execution 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.