IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7507/2019 BETWEEN:
Appu S/o Subramani Aged about 24 years Residing at C/o Rajanna Building No.46, 1st Cross, 1st Main, Bandappa Road, Near Chowdeshwari Temple B.K.Nagar, Yeshwanthapura Bengaluru-560 022.
(By Sri M.R.Nanjunda Gowda, Advocate for Sri Ramesha H.N., Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka by Yelahanka New Town Police Station Represented by State public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru-560 001.
…Petitioner ... Respondent (By Sri M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.244/2018 of Yelahanka New Town Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B r/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., to release him on regular bail in Crime No.244/2018 of Yelahanka New Town Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 302, 201, 120B and Section 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. Gist of the complaint is that on 19.09.2018 at about 7.30 a.m., elder sister of the complainant came to his house, informed about the death of his son. After receiving the information the complainant rushed towards the spot. There, he found the dead body of his son lying on the ground. On the dead body, the complainant saw bleeding out of mouth and ear, wound mark on the right cheek, ligature marks around the neck. On the basis of the complaint, a case was registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier, the petitioner/accused No.1 approached this Court and this Court by order dated 07.06.2019 dismissed the petition subsequently, on 23.09.2019, accused No.2 approached this Court in Crl.P. No.1788/2019 and co-ordinate bench by considering the similar facts and circumstances has enlarged him on bail. On the ground of parity, petitioner/accused No.1 is also entitled to be released on bail. It is his further submission that though the charge sheet material indicates that CW.18 is a witness, who has lastly seen the accused along with the deceased but his statement has been recorded on 21.09.2018 though the alleged incident has taken place on 19.09.2018. Further it is submitted that the entire case rests on circumstantial evidence and there are no eye-witness to the alleged incident. Even the circumstances, which are intended to be relied upon are not pointing out the guilt of the accused. It is further submitted that the CCTV footage does not inspire any confidence to point out to the guilt of the accused. Further it is submitted that he is ready to abide by the conditions imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer the sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 has approached this Court and no new grounds have been made out. It is his further submission that CW.18 is the witness, who has seen the accused and the deceased consuming liquor in the Bar and the same has been recorded in CCTV footage and the same has been produced along with the charge sheet in DVD. It is further submitted that there is a strong motive and last seen theory. Further it is submitted that he was having illicit relationship with accused No.2. In that light, the motive plays a very vital role. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the material placed on record indicates that the entire case rest on circumstantial evidence and the circumstance on which the prosecution is intending to rely upon is that of CW.18 as the last seen theory and the strong motive that accused No.1 for having a illicit relationship with accused No.2. But under similar facts and circumstances of the case, already co-ordinate bench in Crl.P. No.1788/2019 dated 23.09.2019 has enlarged accused No.2 on bail. Even the records shows that the alleged incident has taken place on 19.09.2018 but the statement of CW.18 has been recorded on 21.09.2018 there is delay in recording the statement of the said witness. Insofar as the CCTV footage is concerned, merely at the time of consuming the alcohol, the deceased and the accused were together no inference can be drawn that the accused has committed the offence. On the ground of parity and other grounds discussed above, petitioner/accused No.1 has made out a case to enlarge him on bail.
8. In that light, petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused No.1 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.244/2018 of Yelahanka New Town Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 302, 201, 120B and Section 34 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner/accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
3. He shall be regular in attending the trial. If he miss a single date of hearing, the trial Court is at liberty to take him to the custody.
4. He shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., 1st of every month between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police station, till the trial is concluded.
Sd/- JUDGE VBS