R. LAKSHMINARAYANA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the petition filed by the petitioner/accused 2 under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 seeking his release on bail for the alleged offence punishable under Section 395 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered in respondent-police station Crime No. 66 of 2014. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused 2 and also the learned MGCP for the respondent-State.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitted that though it is alleged that the incident took place on 11-2-2014, complaint has been filed on 13-2-2014 and hence, there is a delay of two days, which is not properly explained by the prospection. Learned Counsel also made the submission that as per the case of the complainant, it is specifically mentioned that six persons came in a car at about 12.30 p.m. and stopped the car in front of the house of the complainant, out of six, two persons stood near the car and four persons entered into her house and committed the robbery of Rs. 10,125/- and also the silver ankle chain and waist chain. Learned Counsel made the submission that looking to the remand application, the police have also introduced the seventh person that he was also involved on the date of incident in committing the alleged offence. Hence, he submitted that there is no basis for the police to introduce the seventh person, which itself is creating a serious doubt about case of the prosecution. He further submitted that the present petitioner is a student, studying in a college and next month he is having his examination. Hence, he submitted that the only material as per the case of the prosecution that from the present petitioner a sum of Rs. 600/- has been recovered. Learned Counsel submitted that whether that Rs. 600/- is belonging to the complainant or to the petitioner himself is a matter to be ascertained during the course of trial. Hence, he submitted to admit the petitioner on bail by imposing any reasonable conditions.

(3.) As against this, the learned HCGP during the course of his arguments submitted that recovery of amount of Rs. 600/- from the possession of the petitioner itself goes to show his involvement in the commission of alleged offence. He also submitted that, looking to the other witnesses recorded by the police during investigation, it will make out a prima facie case against the present petitioner in committing the alleged offence. Learned HCGP further made the submission that there are four other cases also pending against the petitioner. Hence, he is not entitled to be granted with bail.