The petitioner-accused No.1 is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.65/2023 of Kodigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru, pending on the file of the VII A.C.M.M. at Bengaluru, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 143 , 147 , 148 , 307 , 323 , 324 , 326 , 354 , 504 , 506 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ' IPC '), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Mr. Somashekhar.

2. Heard Sri Manjunath B.R, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.N. Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1. He is innocent and law abiding citizen. He has not committed any offences as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. Since charge sheet is filed against him, there is reasonable apprehension of being arrested. Accused nos.2 to 6 are already on bail. The injured is already discharged from the -3- NC: 2023:KHC:24175 CRL.P No. 5061 of 2023 hospital. There was no intention to cause death of the injured. Since investigation is completed, the petitioner is not required for investigation. The petitioner is the permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title to the petition and is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition in the interest of justice.

4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioner for having committed the offences and he is the main accused. He has assaulted the injured with a knife causing grievous injuries. Four persons have sustained injuries in the incident. Petitioner is absconding since from the date of commission of the offence. The petitioner had moved a similar petition u/s 438 Cr.P.C. in Crl. P. No. 3967/2023. After addressing the arguments at length, the petition was withdrawn. But he never appeared before the I.O., nor surrendered to the jurisdictional Magistrate. Under such circumstances, the successive petition for grant of anticipatory bail is not maintainable. Accordingly, prayed for dismissal of the bail petition.

NC: 2023:KHC:24175 CRL.P No. 5061 of 2023

5. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

6. My answer to the above point is in the negative for the following:

7. Specific allegations are made against the petitioner. He is arrayed as accused No.1. It is specifically stated that he has assaulted the injured with a knife with an intention to cause his death. Incised wound measuring 15 x 2 x 1 cm. was caused to the injured over his neck and another incised wound over the left side of the neck just below injury no.1 was also with similar measurement. One more incised wound was found at the right shoulder measuring 5x8x0.5 cm. Injury nos.1 and 2 are grievous in nature.

8. Admittedly, the petitioner had moved similar petition seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crl. P. No. 3967/2023. After addressing arguments at length, learned counsel for the -5- NC: 2023:KHC:24175 CRL.P No. 5061 of 2023 petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition. Accordingly, petition was came to be dismissed vide order dated 18.02.2022. Even thereafter petitioner had not appeared before the I.O.

9. The Apex Court in the case of Md. Shamim Khan Vs. The State of Jharkhand1 considered a similar situation where successive petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. was filed seeking grant of anticipatory bail and it is specifically held that the practice of filing second application u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. after the first being rejected is to be deprecated.

10. In view of the above, I do not find any reason to entertain the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the petition is dismissed.

JUDGE bvv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19 1 Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9449/2021 disposed of on 16.12.2021