IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.517/2019 BETWEEN:
Shri Lokesh @ Loki N, S/o Narayanappa M., Aged 35 years, R/at Tower No.6, House B-102, Janardhan Shubha Apartment, M. Medihalli Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru – 562 106.
(By Sri.P. Prasanna Kumar, Advocate for Sri. Kirankumar, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka By Station House Officer, Attibele Police Station, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, ...Petitioner Bengalurur – 560 001. ...Respondent (By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.245/2018 of Attibele Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence p/u/s 364, 302, 201, 120(B), 212 and 506 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.5 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking his release on bail in Crime No.245/2018 (C.C. No.1565/2018) of Attibele Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120(B), 408, 120(B), 212 and 506 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the deceased and accused No.1 had some ill-will and each of them were claiming supremacy in their area and the deceased had cut the finger of a member of the group of accused No.1. Being aggrieved by the said act of the deceased, accused Nos.1 to 8 conspired to commit the murder of the deceased. In execution of such conspiracy, on 01.07.2018 at about 8.30 p.m. accused No.1 secured the deceased to Sai Anugraha Layout and offered him alcohol. At about 10.30 p.m. when the deceased was intoxication, accused Nos.3, 5 and 8 assaulted him with knives and accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 assaulted with bear bottles on his back, armpits and stomach. As a result of the same, he lost his consciousness. Immediately, accused Nos.1 to 4 took the deceased in a car towards Anekal and have assaulted him with knives on his chest, neck and stomach repeatedly. Accused No.2 has stabbed to his neck and accused No.1 assaulted with knife on his shoulder. As a result of the same, he breathed his lost. In order to screen the offences, they took the said body in a car dickey and thereafter, the same was thrown in eucalyptus groove. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered and after the investigation, the charge sheet has been filed.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that under the similar facts and circumstances, already accused Nos.6 and 7 have been released on bail. On the ground of parity, the petitioner/accused No.5 is also entitled to be released on bail. It is further submitted that the contents of the charge sheet material clearly distinguishes that there are two incidents. The first incident wherein, accused No.5 has participated and the deceased has lost his consciousness. Subsequently, it is accused Nos.1 to 4 have took the deceased in eucalyptus groove and have assaulted the deceased with knives repeatedly and thereby, they have caused the death of the deceased. The petitioner/accused No.5 was not having any intention to cause the death of the deceased. Further it is submitted that when the complaint was registered only against accused Nos.1 to 4 subsequently, the petitioner/accused No.5 has been included on the basis of the statements said to have been given by the eye- witnesses. It is further submitted that there is no consistency in the statement of the eye-witnesses. The petitioner/accused No.5 is ready to abide by the conditions imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer surety. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused No.5 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that there are eye-witnesses to the alleged incident. The petitioner/accused No.5 has also assaulted with knife on the stomach of the deceased and the deceased had died due to the chop wounds. It is further submitted that the bike and stained clothes which have been used for commission of offences, has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner/accused No.5. There is ample material to connect the petitioner/accused No.5 to the alleged crime. If the petitioner/accused No.5 is ordered to be released on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the contents of the charge sheet material, it indicates that at the first instance, accused Nos.3, 5 and 8 have assaulted along with accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 with knife and beer bottles subsequently, the deceased was taken by accused Nos.1 to 4 in a car and again in eucalyptus groove, they have assaulted with knives repeatedly. As a result of the same, the deceased breathed his lost. Even as could be seen from the order passed by this Court in Crl.P. No.8906/2018 dated 08.01.2019, under the similar facts and circumstance, already accused Nos.6 and 7 have been released on bail. On the ground of parity, the petitioner/accused No.5 is also entitled to be released on bail by imposing some stringent conditions.
8. In that light, petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused No.5 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.245/2018 (C.C. No.1565/2018) of Attibele Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120(B), 408, 120(B), 212 and 506 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner/accused No.5 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
3. He shall mark his attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police station, till the trial is concluded.
4. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
5. He shall be regular in attending the trial.
Sd/- JUDGE VBS