AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This petition is filed by accused No.7 in Crime No.307/2015 seeking anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accused No.1 to 6 are already on bail as per the orders passed by this Court in Crl. P.Nos.2740/2016;
3284/2016; 2889/2016 and 3284/2016. However the learned HCGP submits that the said accused were granted bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., whereas the present petitioner has been absconding since the date of registration of the case. Therefore, the benefit of the earlier orders cannot be extended to the petitioner.
On going through the materials placed before the Court, I find that the accusation made against the petitioner is that he was present at the spot during the occurrence and he held the deceased. Under the said circumstances, merely because the petitioner did not seek for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner cannot be denied the benefit of the bail order granted to the other accused if he is otherwise entitled for bail. As the circumstances of the case indicate that the petitioner is standing at par with the other accused, I am of the view that petitioner could be granted the benefit of the bail on the same terms and conditions.
Hence, the following order:-
Criminal petition is allowed. In the event of the arrest of the petitioner he shall be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:-
a. The petitioner shall furnish a bond for Rs.1.00 lakh(Rupees One lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate.
b. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when summoned for the purpose of interrogation or any further investigation in to the matter;
c. The petitioner shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses;
d. Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission