IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7377/2017 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8297/2017 In Criminal Petition No.7377/2017 BETWEEN:
Ganesh @ Koti, S/o Venkatesh, Aged about 23 years, Residing at No.106, I Main, I Cross, Indiranagar I Stage, Krishna Temple Road, Indiranagar, Bengaluru – 560 038 ... Petitioner (By Sri. A.S. Kulkarni, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, By Pulakeshinagar Police Station, Bengaluru – 560 005.
Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru – 560 001 (By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) ...Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.90/2017 of Pulakeshinagar Police Station, Bengaluru City and C.C.No.55480/2017, for the offence punishable under Section 120(B), 341, 302, 201, 203 read with Section 149 of IPC.
In Criminal Petition No.8297/2017 BETWEEN:
Doreen Kumar W/o. Late. Kumar Aged about 38 years, Residing at No.27, 1st ‘A’ Cross, Saraswathipura, Halasuru, Bengaluru – 560 008.
(By Sri. Veeranna G. Tigadi, Advocate For Sri. Ramesha H.N., Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka By Bayappanahalli P.S., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560 001 (By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) ... Petitioner ...Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.90/2017 of Pulakeshinagar Police Station, Bangalore for the offence punishable under Section 120(B), 341, 302, 201 and 203 read with Section 149 of IPC.
These Criminal Petitions are coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Crl.P.No.7377/2017 C/w Crl.P.No.8297/2017 since these two petitions are in respect of same crime number and common facts are involved in both the petitions they were taken to dispose of the same in common in order to avoid repetition and facts of law.
2. The first petition is filed by accused No.7 and connected petition is filed by accused No.4. Both petitions are filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120B, 341, 302, 201, 203 read with 149 of IPC, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.90/2017 and now pending in C.C.No.55480/2017 on the file of XI ACMM at Bangalore.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.7 and learned counsel appearing for petitioner / accuse No.4 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State in respect of both the petitions.
4. The learned counsel in respect of both the petitions made submission that looking into investigation material collected even admittedly according to the prosecution case, both these petitioners were not present at the spot. The allegations as per the complaint and the material collected prima facie goes to show serious allegations against accused Nos.1 to 3. They also made submission that the only allegations as against the present petitioners is under Section 120B with criminal conspiracy along with other accused persons to eliminate the deceased Kumar. The learned counsel made submission that accused Nos.5 and 6 have already been granted bail. They are also similarly situate as that of the present petitioners. Hence the learned counsel made the submission by imposing reasonable conditions they may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader made submission that looking to the prosecution material, it is no doubt that material prima facie goes to show that accused Nos.1 and 2 are assailants. So far as petitioners / accused Nos.4 and 7 are concerned they are parties to the conspiracy for eliminating the deceased Kumar. Hence, learned HCGP made submission that there is a prima facie material collected by the Investigation officer during investigation. Even with regard to the role of the present petitioners in committing the alleged offence they are not entitled to grant bail.
6. I have perused the grounds urged both in the bail petitions, FIR, complaint and entire material produced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
7. Even according to the prosecution case, the only eye witness is one Mani-CW1. I have gone through the statement of said Mani. No doubt he mentioned that three persons came in two wheeler vehicle and assaulted the deceased Kumar. The other material said to have been collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation and as submitted by the learned HCGP goes to show that the assault alleged is by accused Nos.1 and 2. The PM report regarding cause of death is due to shock and heamorrhage as a result of injuries sustained to the head.
8. Even according to the prosecution case so far as petitioners herein are concerned that there is a conspiracy by these two persons with accused No.5 and it is accused No.5 who arranged with other accused persons for committing the murder of deceased Kumar. Whether there was such conspiracy or not by the present petitioners is a matter of trial. Now that the investigation is complete and charge sheet is filed, by imposing reasonable conditions petitioners can be admitted to bail as accused Nos.5 and 6 under similar circumstances have been already considered and admitted for bail. Both the petitions are allowed.
9. Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed.
Petitioners/accused Nos.7 and 4 are ordered to be released on bail for the offences punishable under 120B, 341, 302, 201, 203 read with 149 of IPC, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.90/2017 subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioners have to execute a personal bond each for Rs.1,00,000/- and has to furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioners have to appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/- JUDGE UN