KEERTHI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his apprehended arrest in Crime No.71/2016 registered with Kanakapura Rural Police Station, Ramanagara District, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 395, 324, 427, 504, 354, 323 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.

(2.) Heard Sri S. Javeed, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri K.Nageshwarappa, learned HCGP for the respondent -State and perused the records.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that a complaint was lodged by one Sri. Devaraju S.K against accused Nos.1 to 3 and 10 to 15 and other persons on 20/04/2016. He further submits that the remand application was filed on 24/04/2016 including the name of the petitioner/accused No.6. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case though his name was not found in the original complaint filed on 20/04/2016. Accordingly, he prays for allowing this petition. 5. Per contra, the learned HCGP opposing the petition submitted that during the course of the investigation, accused No.21 to 24 were arrested. During investigation, police have found involvement of petitioner and his name was included in the application seeking remand on 24/04/2016. He further submitted that the allegation made in the complaint is serious in nature and custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material papers. Prima facie, in the compliant dated 20/04/2016, name of the petitioner/accused No.6 herein is not found and his name is included subsequently. No other material is brought before this Court to show the involvement of the petitioner in commission of offence and to substantiate inclusion of his name as an accused. In the circumstances, this petition merits consideration and deserves to be allowed by granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner by imposing stringent conditions. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER