w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Rajaroop Kumar Nayak @ Bhanti Dhani v/s The State of Karnataka, Represented by SPP, Kalaburagi

Company & Directors' Information:- A. KUMAR AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U19201UP1995PTC018833

Company & Directors' Information:- S KUMAR & CO PVT LTD [Not available for efiling] CIN = U51909WB1946PTC014540

Company & Directors' Information:- S KUMAR AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U45203DL1964PTC117149

Company & Directors' Information:- KUMAR (INDIA) PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51909WB1986PTC041038

Company & Directors' Information:- P KUMAR & CO PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27105WB1998PTC087242

Company & Directors' Information:- KUMAR L P G PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U23201DL2001PTC113203

Company & Directors' Information:- S P NAYAK AND COMPANY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U99999MH1943PTC003714

Company & Directors' Information:- M KUMAR AND CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL1982PTC014823

Company & Directors' Information:- B N KUMAR & CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U52341WB1941PTC010643

Company & Directors' Information:- NAYAK PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U19122DL2012PTC238677

Company & Directors' Information:- NAYAK AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999KA1947PTC001182

    Criminal Petition No. 200705 of 2020

    Decided On, 10 September 2020

    At, High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench OF Kalaburagi


    For the Petitioner: Shivakumar Malipatil, Advocate. For the Respondent: Sharanabasappa M. Patil, HCGP.

Judgment Text

(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to allow the petition and direction may be given to the concerned police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.52/2020 of Yadgir Town Police Station, on the file of CJM Yadgir, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 & 307 of IPC.)

1. This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking a direction to the respondent - Police to release him on bail in the event of his arrest.

2. Brief facts of the case as per the complaint averments are that, the complainant is the son-in-law of injured Marilingappa and on 24.06.202 at about 7.00 a.m. when the father-in-law of the complainant went for morning walk on his Scooty and on that day at about 9.30 a.m. when the complainant was in house, the friends of father-in-law of the complainant came to the house and informed that his father-in-law had sustained injuries and fallen on the ground, as he was assaulted by some unknown persons and he was taken to Government Hospital for treatment. Immediately, the complainant went to the Government Hospital and saw his father-in-law, who suffered injuries due to assault made by some persons and later, the injured was sent to Kalaburagi for higher treatment. Therefore, with these allegations, the complaint is lodged against unknown persons. On the basis of the said complaint, a case is registered in Crime No.52/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 307 of IPC.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the name of the petitioner is not found in the complaint and only on the basis of the surmises and conjectures on the part of the police, the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the crime. He further submitted that even though the petitioner is not concerned to the alleged crime, the police are making effort to implicate him falsely into the case for some other reason. Therefore, he submitted that the life and liberty of the petitioner is at stake. Further he submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this court while granting bail and he would co-operate with investigation. With these submissions, he prays to allow the petition and to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

5. On the other hand, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State submitted that the victim had sustained injuries due to the assault made and even though initially the complaint was lodged against the unknown persons, during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer had suspected the complicity of the petitioner into the crime. Therefore, he submitted that the interrogation of the petitioner is very much essential regarding complicity of the crime. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. Upon considering the materials available at this stage, there is no allegation in the complaint against the petitioner. Initially, the complaint is filed and crime is registered against the unknown persons. It is submitted that the petitioner is completely alien to the alleged crime. The respondent-State has filed objections, but has not disclosed the material how the Investigating Officer had suspected the complicity of the petitioner into the crime. It is only stated in the objection statement that if the petitioner is released on bail, then there is likelihood of tampering the prosecution witnesses and also hampering the trial and there is also likelihood of fleeing away from taking the trial. Except this, there is no prima facie material, showing the involvement of the petitioner in the crime.

7. Therefore, considering all these factors, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of anticipatory bail, but with some stringent conditions, so as to keeping apprehension of the prosecution as well as considering the individual liberty of the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondent-Police are directed to release the petitioner/accused on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.52/2020 of Yadgir Town Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 307 of IPC, pending on the file of CJM, Yadgir, subject to the following:-


1. The petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court;

2. The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the Investigating Officer on every alterna

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

tive Sundays between 6.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till filing of charge sheet; 3. The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer for the purpose of investigation as and when called upon; 4. The petitioner shall attend the Court regularly on all the dates of hearing, without fail and shall co-operate for speedy disposal of the case; 5. If the petitioner fails to appear before the court on two consecutive dates of hearing, then it may entail cancellation of liberty granted by this order.