IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6394 OF 2017 BETWEEN:-
LAKSHMI PRASANNA S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA, 38 YEARS, R/AT # 21, 9TH MAIN, 7TH CROSS, SHIVNAGAR, RAJAJINAGAR 3RD BLOCK, BENGALURU-560010 ... PETITIONER (By Sri: SHANKARAPPA S, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MICOLAYOUT PS REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU -560009 ... RESPONDENT (By Sri: K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETR. ON BAIL IN CR.NO.422/2012 (S.C.NO.340/2013) OF MICO LAYOUT P.S., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 392,302 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRL. P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent. No written objections are filed by the State opposing the petition.
2. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are that he alongwith accused Nos.2 and 3 entered the house of the deceased on 22.8.2012 at about 10.00 a.m. The accused persons strangulated the deceased and robbed the gold ornaments from the dwelling house of the deceased. The deceased was found unconscious on 23.8.2012 at 5.00 a.m., Initially, the FIR was registered against unknown persons. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the present petitioner and two other accused alleging the commission of the offences punishable under sections 392, 302 r/w section 34 Indian Penal Code. It is stated that the deceased died three months after the incident. The cause of death is certified as multiple organ failure.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.1 solely on the basis on the voluntary statement of the co-accused. The prosecution has not conducted any test identification parade for identification of the accused. The sole circumstance relied on by the prosecution is the circumstance of the deceased last seen in the company of the accused. The statement of CW-6 in this regard indicates that he saw the deceased on the morning of 22.08.2012. Having regard to the time gap, it cannot be said that accused No.1 was the author of the crime. That apart, no recovery has been effected at the instance of the present petitioner. The ornaments said to be belonging to the deceased were recovered solely at the instance of accused No.2 and 3. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are already enlarged on bail by the orders of this Court in Crl.P.No.4968/2015 dated 12.8.2015 and Crl.P.No.3820/2015 dated 16.7.2015.
4. Having regard to the nature of the evidence collected by the prosecution in proof of the complicity of the present petitioner, the petitioner also requires to be enlarged on bail at par with accused No. 2 and 3.
5. Hence, the following order:-
Criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:-
a. The petitioner shall furnish a bond for Rs.1.00 lakh(Rupees One lakh only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
b. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
c. The petitioner shall not get himself involved in similar offences.
Sd/- JUDGE *mn/-