Case Note & Summary
The judgment pertains to two criminal petitions filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking anticipatory bail. The petitioners, Harikrishna and S. Shivaramprasad, were accused in Crime No.35/2020 registered at Talagattapura Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The complaint was lodged on 14.02.2020. The petitioners apprehended arrest and sought pre-arrest bail. The court noted that the petitions were connected to the same crime number and were taken up together for common disposal. The learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Muzaffar Ahmed, argued that the petitioners were not named in the FIR and there was no prima facie material to show their active participation in the alleged murder. The learned High Court Government Pleader, Sri K. Nageshwarappa, opposed the bail on behalf of the respondent-State. The court, after hearing both sides, observed that the petitioners had not been arrested and that custodial interrogation may not be necessary at this stage. The court granted anticipatory bail to both petitioners subject to conditions, including that they shall cooperate with the investigation, appear before the investigating officer as and when required, and not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. The court also directed that the petitioners shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on furnishing a personal bond and surety. The judgment was delivered through video conference on 03.07.2020.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Murder - Section 302 IPC - The court considered whether anticipatory bail should be granted to accused persons in a murder case where the complaint was lodged on 14.02.2020 and the petitioners had not been arrested. The court held that since the petitioners were not named in the FIR and there was no prima facie material showing their active participation in the murder, they were entitled to anticipatory bail subject to conditions. (Paras 1-6) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - The court examined the applicability of Section 34 IPC in the context of anticipatory bail. It held that mere presence or association without evidence of common intention or overt act does not justify denial of bail. The court directed the petitioners to cooperate with investigation and appear before the investigating officer as required. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, given the allegations of murder and the stage of investigation.
Final Decision
Both criminal petitions are allowed. The petitioners are granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.35/2020 of Talagattapura Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC. In the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety for the likesum, subject to conditions including cooperation with investigation, appearance before the investigating officer as required, and not tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
Law Points
- Anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- prima facie case
- custodial interrogation
- reasonable apprehension of arrest
