IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1343/2019 BETWEEN:
Aruna K.H, S/o. Hanumanthappa, Aged about 32 years, Residing at:
In front of MDCC Bank, K.R. Pet Town and Taluk, Mandya District -571 436. ...Petitioner (By Smt. Raksha Keerthana.K, Adv., for Sri Kemparaju, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By K.R. Pet Rural Police Station, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court Complex, Bengaluru-560 001. ... 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 Cr.No.247/2016 (S.C.No.5021/2017) of K.R.Pet Town P.S., Mandya District for the offence p/u/s 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 212, 114, 506, 120B, 109, 201, 149 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This petition has been filed by the petitioner- accused No.11 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking his release on bail in S.C. No.5088/2014 on the file of III Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Mandya (Crime No.247/2016 of K.R. Pet Town Police Station) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 212, 114, 506, 120B, 109, 201 read with 149 of IPC and under Section 25(1) of Arms Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the complainant’s aunt is having three male children and two female children and the female children have not yet got married and her son Rajesh has not married. They are residing together. The said Rajesh was doing cycle business and on 19.08.2016 at about 3.00 p.m when his brother Rajesh was sitting in the shop at about 5.00 p.m., a person came inside the shop and he was holding the long and asked him to come out. The witness Chetu due to fear ran away from that place and Rajesh due to fear was standing there itself. The said persons came along with 3 to 4 other persons and tried to assault Rajesh. When Venu asked who are they, the accused persons assaulted Rajesh with long and caused bleeding injuries and thereafter they dragged him to the main road and also assaulted on vital part of the body with an intention to kill him. As a result of the same, he sustained grievous injuries and died at the hospital. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that name of the petitioner/accused No.11 is not found in the complaint and he was not present as on the date of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that as per the charge sheet material, accused No.11 was in a judicial custody and he instigated the accused persons to commit the alleged crime. His physical presence was also not there at the time of the alleged incident. She further submitted that already accused Nos.12, 13, 14, and 7 under similar facts and circumstances have been released on bail. Even on the ground of parity, petitioner/accused No.11 is also entitled to be released on bail. She further submitted that the criminal cases registered against the petitioner have been closed by acquittal of the petitioner. She further submitted that petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions and ready to offer surety. On these grounds, she prays to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused No.11 on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that petitioner/accused No.11 has instigated the remaining accused persons by giving supari though he was in judicial custody. He further submitted that the petitioner is also involving in serious other offences and he is having a bad antecedent. He further submitted that because of earlier enmity the deceased assaulted accused No.11. Hence, petitioner/accused No.11 has instigated other accused persons and eliminated the deceased Rajesh and he is the master mind behind all the accused. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission of both the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. As could be seen from the records, already the charge sheet has been filed and accused Nos.8 to 10 and 12 to 14 have been released on bail. It is pertinent to note that as on the date of the alleged incident accused No.11 was in jail and he was not present at the place of the alleged incident. Whether accused No.11 instigated the remaining accused persons and had paid supari or not is the matter which has to be appreciated and considered only after full fledged trial. Under similar facts and circumstances, other accused persons have been released on bail. Hence, even on the ground of parity, petitioner/accused No.11 is also entitled to be released on bail. In that light, petition is allowed.
8. Petitioner/accused No.11 is enlarged on bail in S.C. No.5088/2014 on the file of III Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Mandya (Crime No.247/2016 of K.R. Pet Town Police Station) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 212, 114, 506, 120B, 109, 201 read with 149 of IPC and under Section 25(1) of Arms Act subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner/accused No.11 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
3. He shall mark his attendance once in a month on every 1st till the trial is concluded.
4. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
5. He shall not indulge in similar type of activities.
Sd/- JUDGE nms