IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2602 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
H.B.ABISHEKGOWDA @ ABI S/O PRAKASH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/AT 7TH CROSS, VIDYANIKETHAN SCHOOL ROAD, SUNKADA KATTE BENGALURU–77 PERMANENTLY R/AT HOSAHALLI, DUNDA POST DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT–05 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI K.N.NARAYANA SWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KYATHASANDRA POLICE STATION-05 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU–01 V.MANGALA @ RADHA D/O VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS ICICI BANK EMPLOYEE R/AT NO.296, 5TH CROSS SRINIVASA NAGARA SUNKADA KATTE BENGALURU–91 …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.218/2018 OF KYATHASANDRA POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss.120-B, 302, 201 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND U/Ss.3(2)(5) OF SC/ST ACT. THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU HAS REJECTED THE BAIL PETITION ON 22.03.2019 IN CRL.MISC.NO.184/2019.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Notice has been served through Investigating Officer to the complainant.
2. The petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail in Crime No.218/2018 of Kyathasandra Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State and perused the records.
4. The factual matrix of the case as divulged from the charge sheet papers are that the accused No.1 was having illicit intimacy with the mother of CW.1 and in fact he was always giving money to the said lady. As the said lady was demanding more money from accused No.1 and also threatening him that she would become pregnant at the instance of accused No.1, she would disclose the same to the public at large and she had also illicit intimacy with one milk Rajanna. Because of these reasons, accused No.1 had a conspiracy with accused Nos.2 to 4 to do away with the life of that lady by name Mahalakshmi. In this background, it is alleged that on 25.09.2018, accused No.1 took the said lady on his two wheeler motor cycle and accused Nos.2 to 4 also came to a particular place in their vehicles along with the weapons like knife and iron rod. They took the said lady to the place called Halugondanahalli Village cross near the land of one Tandavamurthy and there all the accused persons have assaulted the said lady, particularly one Abhishek, juvenile offender assaulted on the head; petitioner/accused No.2 stabbed her on the chest and accused No.1 also assaulted her with knife etc. thereby caused severe injuries. Thereafter, she succumbed to those injuries on the spot itself.
5. It is alleged that the said lady belonged to Scheduled Tribe and taking advantage of the situation that she belonged to Scheduled Tribe, the accused Nos.1 to 4 have committed such an offence. On the basis of the said complaint, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and also Sections 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘SC/ST Act’ for short). After investigation, a charge sheet has been laid against the accused persons.
6. On careful perusal of the entire charge sheet papers, also as submitted by the learned HCGP and as well as the learned counsel for the petitioner, the entire case revolves around the circumstances to accept the circumstance of recovery of a knife at the instance of accused No.2, which was stained with blood and tallied with the blood stains of the deceased. No other circumstance is there against accused No.2. At this stage, learned Counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that the blood sample of accused has not been taken to overcome the said blood group also belonged to the accused. Therefore, at this stage, on the basis of the sole said circumstance, the Court cannot draw any inference against the accused. The whole case of the prosecution by proving the circumstances has to be established beyond reasonable doubt during the course of full dressed trial.
7. In the above said circumstances, the petitioner/accused No.2 requires to be released on bail, particularly, under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the following order:
The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.2 shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.218/2018 of Kyathasandra Police Station (Special C.C.No.1/2019 on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge at Tumakuru) for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE cp*