IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8514/2017 BETWEEN:
JAGADEESH S @ JAGA, S/O SRI. RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, J.C.B. DRIVER, R/AT THIMMANAYAKANAKOTE VILLAGE, KOTTURU POST, NIDAGALA HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK, TUMKURU – 572103.
(BY SMT. MANJULA D., ADV.,) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS TUMKURU RURAL POLICE STATION, KORA, TUMKUR – 572103.
REPRESENTED BY THE SPP, OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560001.
... PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.CHETAN DESAI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.108/2017 OF KORA POLICE STATION, TUMKURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 307, 302, 120B, 201, 176 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3(1)(r), 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304A of IPC, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.108/2017. But subsequently, as per the requisition made by the Police, the offence under Section 120B, 201, 176 read with 34 of IPC and 307and 302 of IPC are also came to be inserted in the said case.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.3 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.
4. The complainant in this case is not an eye- witness to the incident; on the basis of the information furnished by one Ravi, the complainant lodged the complaint. Looking to the contents of the complaint, it is a case of accident, accordingly, FIR came to be registered for the alleged offence under Section 279, 337, 304A of IPC. The name of the petitioner is not figured either in the complaint or in the FIR, but subsequently, only on the basis of the statement of one Shivashankar/accused No.1, copy of which is produced as at Annexure-D, petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused No.3 in the case. I have perused the statement of Shivashankar, which is recorded by the Police after more than two months from the date of alleged incident.
It is not stated by said Shivashanakr that he has seen petitioner assaulting deceased Devaraj and causing his death. Therefore, even if all these materials are taken into consideration, the prosecution has not placed prima-facie material to show the involvement of the petitioner in committing the alleged offence. The petitioner has contended in the petition that he is innocent, there is false implication in the case and he has undertaken to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. The main accused i.e., accused No.1, has already been granted bail by the order of this Court. Hence, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused No.3 is ordered to be released on bail in connection with Crime No.108/2017 registered for the above said offences, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner has to execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and has to furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner has to appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/- JUDGE BSR