IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3321/2019 Between:
Shri. Beeru Subedhi Aged about 24 years, S/o. Kim Bahaddor Suberi, At: Prabhakara Reddy House, Behind Canara Bank, Haraluru Main Road, Somasundarapalya, Bengaluru 560 102.
… Petitioner (By Sri. Jagadeesh M.L, Advocate) And:
State of Karnataka By Bande Palya Police, Bangalore District, Rep. by SPP, High Court Complex, Bengaluru 560 001.
(By Sri. S. Rachaiah, HCGP) …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to release the petitioner on bail in Crime No.213/2018 now S.C.No.524/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 201 and 302 of IPC registered by the respondent – Bandepalya Police, Bengaluru, pending on the file of the Hon’ble LXIV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCCH-65), Bengaluru.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER Petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.213/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 201 and 302 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the informant who is the uncle of the deceased has given a complaint on 10.11.2018 alleging that on 10.11.2018, he received a call from the wife of the deceased that someone had killed Arjun Buda and thrown the body near Haralur.
3. It comes out from the complaint that when the informant enquired with the sister of the petitioner she is reported to have stated that she had seen the deceased - Arjun Budha on an occasion earlier. It is stated that on 09.11.2018, after dinner the main door of the house was not locked and the petitioner, his sister and others were sleeping in the bedroom. At about 2.00 a.m., some unknown person entered into the house and tried to hug the sister of the petitioner. At that point of time, it is alleged that sister of the petitioner raised an alarm and on seeing the intruder the petitioner enquired and when there was no satisfactory explanation, it is alleged that the petitioner assaulted the deceased with the small gas cylinder. It is stated that the deceased succumbed to injuries and died. On the basis of the complaint, FIR is registered. Investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fact that the deceased had entered the house of the petitioner at 2.00 a.m. in the morning and that the petitioner was not familiar with the deceased and that the deceased attempted to hug the petitioner’s sister, are all factors that need to be taken note of while appreciating the context in which the alleged offence is stated to have occurred. It is submitted that even if the case of the prosecution is to be accepted, the act has been committed on the spur of moment and also in exercise of self-defense, which are matters to be proved during trail.
5. Taking note of the context of occurrence of the incident, there is force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the alleged incident has occurred as a reaction to the presence of deceased at unearthly hours in the bedroom of petitioner’s house. Proof of offence is a matter for trial. Present proceedings cannot be treated to be punitive in nature. Question as to the reaction of the petitioner and the attack of the deceased being an exercise of right of self-defense or otherwise is a matter to be proved during trial. Taking note of the peculiar facts of the case and the factual context in which the alleged incident has occurred, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. Accordingly, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.213/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 201 and 302 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without permission of the trial Court.
(iii) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his attendance before the concerned Station House Officer, once a month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till conclusion of the trial.
(iv) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(v) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(vi) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(vii) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE VP