IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.1975/2019 BETWEEN:
Chamanna @ Chama, S/o.Ramanna, Aged about 27 years, R/at Kereyindalapalya Village, Chennigoudanapalya, Hamlet of Sobaganahalli, Koththagere Hobli, Kunigal Taluk, Tumakuru District-572 130. ... Petitioner (By Sri.B.V.Pinto, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, By Kunigal Police, By State Public Prosecutor, High Court, Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri.K.P.Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.394/2018 (C.C.No.1/2019) of Kunigal P.S., Tumakuru for the offences p/u/s 302 r/w 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.394/2018 for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complaint was filed by one Somanna S.K. stating that the offence aforestated had been committed by the accused. It is stated that the complainant and another were returning from Gubbi and when they were near Veerabhadra Swamy Temple, at about 8:30 p.m., the deceased Gangadharaiah stopped the vehicle and requested the complainant to drop the deceased to his village. It is sated that the deceased went in the complainant’s bike and as they were traveling near Bagenahalli Road, it is alleged that accused including the petitioner and accused No.2 have pulled the deceased down from the motorcycle and it is alleged that accused No.2 caused injury to the deceased by a stone while the petitioner is stated to have assaulted the deceased on his face by a bangle. It is stated that the deceased succumbed to injuries and died. In light of the said incident, complaint is lodged, FIR is registered and the charge sheet has been filed.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that there was an earlier altercation on the same day at about 7:30 p.m., between accused No.2, the complainant and others. This aspect of the matter would be of relevance to determine as to whether the complainant was the aggressor or not. It is stated that subsequent incident should be read in the context of the earlier altercation. It is further submitted that only allegation against the petitioner is that he has assaulted the deceased by using bangle on his face. The post mortem report states that death is due to injury on the head. Learned counsel further states that the injury allegedly caused by the petitioner resulting in death, is a matter to be proved during the trial.
4. The learned High Court Government Pleader states that there are criminal antecedents and hence releasing the petitioner on bail would result in possible recurrence of offences.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was arrayed as accused in S.C.No.190/2012 and S.C.No.206/2012 and the judgment has ended in acquittal of the accused. The imputation as against the petitioner was that he was an abettor for the commission of the offence. Insofar as the proceedings in Crime No.285/2016, it is submitted that only allegation in the charge sheet is that the petitioner has participated in conspiracy and no overt acts are imputed.
6. Looking into the material on record, the proof of offence is a matter for trial and as to whether the injury inflicted by accused no.1 resulted in death is a matter to be proved during trial especially in the light of infliction of injury on the head of the deceased by accused no.2. The present proceedings cannot be construed to be punitive in nature. It is noted that the petitioner is in custody since 19.10.2018. The apprehension regarding threat by the petitioner to the witness could be addressed by imposing necessary conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions:
In the result, 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.394/2018 for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 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 fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activities of like nature.
(v) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(vi) The petitioner not to enter Shettigere Village, Kunigal Taluk, till conclusion of the trial except with prior permission of the trial Court.
(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 KA