Karnataka High CourtSatish S/O. Siddanna Godihal vs State Of Karnataka on 20 January, 2016Author:Aravind KumarBench:Aravind Kumar1




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                  KALABURAGI BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016

                          BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

         CRIMINAL PETITION No.200027/2016

Between:

Satish S/o Siddanna Godihal
Age: 24 years, Occ: Student
Address: Konnur, Tq. Muddebihal
District Vijayapur
                                                 ...Petitioner
(By Sri I.S.Chimmalagi, Advocate)

And:

State of Karnataka
Represented by Additional SPP
High Court of Karnataka
Kalaburagi Bench
                                               ...Respondent
(By Sri Prakash Yeli, Addl. SPP)

       This Criminal Petition is filed underSection 439of
Cr.P.C., praying to allow this petition and enlarge the
petitioner on bail in Talikot Police Station Crime No.26/2015
which is registered as C.C.No.633/2015, pending on the file
of Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) CJM Court, Muddebihal,
District Vijayapur for alleged offences punishable underSections 366,341,376(1), 504, 506 r/wSection 34of Indian
Penal Code.
                                2




      This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following:

                          ORDERHeard Sri I.S. Chimmalagi, learned Advocate

appearing for petitioner and Sri Prakash Yeli, learned

Additional    State   Public   Prosecutor   appearing   for

respondent-State. Perused the records.2. Petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.1

in Crime No.26/2015 by Talikot Police Station, for the

offences punishable underSections 366,341,376(1)504 and 506 r/wSection 34of IPC.3.      It is the contention of Sri I.S.Chimmalagi,

learned Advocate that petitioner has been falsely

implicated and accused No.2 against whom similar

allegations are made is already enlarged on bail and as

such, even on the ground of parity also petitioner is

entitled for being enlarged on bail.4. Per contra, Sri Prakash Yeli, learned Additional

State Public Prosecutor would contend that since there3is no overt-act of accused No.2 spelled out in complaint,

Co-ordinate bench of this Court after considering the

fact that it was accused No.1 who had allegedly raped

the victim, had granted bail to accused No.2 and as

such on the basis of parity, accused No.1 cannot pray

for being enlarged on bail. Hence, he seeks for rejection

of the petition.5. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing

for parties and on perusal of the records, it would

indicate that petitioner is in judicial custody since

22.09.2015 and allegation against accused No.1 is that

he had committed rape of victim-girl while accused No.2

was holding her. Petitioner is a permanent resident of

Konnur village, Muddebihal Taluk, Vijayapura District

and he is having roots in the community. Investigation

is concluded and charge sheet has been filed and report

of FSL would indicate that "there are no signs of

suggestive penetration of vagina".    Thus, prosecution

will have to prove the guilt of accused during the trial.4Accused No.2 undisputedly has been enlarged on bail in

Criminal Petition No.201030/2015 by order dated

07.10.2015.        Taking into consideration that petitioner

and victim girl are hailing from the same place and she

knew as to who are the accused persons and also taking

into consideration the FSL report, this Court is of the

considered view that petitioner is entitled for grant of

bail.Hence, I proceed to pass the following:ORDERa) Criminal Petition is hereby allowed.b) Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in
             Crime No.26/2015 registered by Talikot Police
             Station, on petitioner executing a personal
             bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One
             Lakh Only) with one surety for the likesum to
             the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court and
             subject to following conditions:i)     Petitioner shall not hold out threats to the
               prosecution witnesses in any manner and5shall not involve himself in any criminal
             activities;ii)    Petitioner shall attend the respondent police
             station once in a week on every Sunday
             between 9.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till the case
             registered against him is disposed of.iii)   Petitioner without seeking exemption shall
             appear before the jurisdictional Court on all
             dates of hearing except under exceptional
             circumstances;iv)    Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the
             Court without express permission till the
             disposal of the case on merits;v)     Prosecution would be at liberty to seek for
             cancellation of bail in the event of any of the
             conditions being violated;Sd/-JUDGE
NB*