IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4840 OF 2019 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5399 OF 2019 IN CRL.P.NO.4840/2019 BETWEEN:
1. M.PRADEEP, S/O MAHANTHESAPPA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC:AUTORICKSHAW DRIVER, R/O 6TH CROSS, NEAR TANK, KAVADIGARAHATTI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 577 501.
2. GIRISH, S/O LATE KENCHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCC: MESON, R/O TANK LINE, 2ND CROSS, KAVADIGARAHATTI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 577 501.
3. KOTESHA, S/O SURESH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O 2ND CROSS, KAVADIGARAHATTI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 577 501.
4. KIRAN @ KIRANKUMAR, S/O MANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O NALLIKATTE VILLAGE, BHARMASAGARA HOBLI, PRESENT R/O 2ND CROSS, KAVADIGARAHATTI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 577 501.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DINESH KUMAR RAO, ADV., FOR SRI. R.B.DESHPANDE, ADV.,) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY CHITRADURGA RURAL POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
(REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU – 560 001).
2. SMT.KAMALAMMA, W/O RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: VEGETABLE VENDER, GUDDADARANGAWWANAHALLI, CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 577 501.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.315/2018 OF CHITRADURGA RURAL POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302, 201, 120-B R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SEC.3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (PA) ACT 1989.
IN CRL.P.NO.5399/2019 BETWEEN:
SMT. KAMALAMMA, W/O LATE R.RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: VEGETABLE VENDER, R/O GUDDADARANGAWWANAHALLI, NEAR ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 577 501.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. DINESH KUMAR RAO, ADV., FOR SRI. R.B.DESHPANDE, ADV.,) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY CHITRADURGA RURAL POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
(REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU – 560 001).
(BY SRI. HONNAPPA, HCGP) …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.315/2018 (SPL.C.(SC/ST) NO.21/2019) OF CHITRADURGA RURAL POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302, 201, 120-B R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SEC.3(2)(V) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Petitioner in Crl.P.No.5399/2019 is arraigned as accused No.2, whereas, petitioners in Crl.P.No.4840/2019 are arraigned as accused Nos.3 to 6.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.
3. Perused the entire charge sheet papers.
4. Initially accused No.2 has filed a complaint stating that the deceased by name Sri.Rajanna is the husband of accused No.2 and he died due to a motor vehicle accident while he was proceeding on his motor cycle bearing registration No. KA 16 EG 0088. On the basis of such information, the police have registered a case in Crime No.315/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304(A) of IPC and also under Section 187 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act. During the course of investigation, the police found accused No.2 being frustrated in life with the deceased as he was ill treating and harassing her, she engaged accused Nos.1 and 3 to 6 for the purpose of doing away with the life of the deceased. On the basis of such conspiracy between accused Nos.1 and 3 to 6 it is alleged that accused Nos.1 and 3 to 6 have assaulted the deceased Rajanna and also accused No.1 has strangulated him with a muffler and accused No.3 assaulted him with iron rod on the leg and thereby deceased died due to strangulation.
5. On the basis of the above said materials, police have arrested accused No.2 and arraigned her as accused No.2 in the case. Petitioners were also arrested and infact accused No.1 who was arrested, his voluntary statement was recorded and a muffler was recovered at the instance of accused No.1. On the basis of his voluntary statement, it appears that the entire case of the prosecution has been built up.
6. During the course of the argument learned counsel submitted before the Court that except the motive factor ie., difference between accused No.2 and deceased, no other connecting materials are available, even there is absolutely no material to show that the accused persons met together at any point of time before and after the incident to draw inference at this stage that there was a conspiracy between accused No.1 and 3 to 6. He also submitted that accused was never seen by anybody either prior to or after the incident.
7. Looking above the said circumstances, learned High Court Government Pleader also unable to point out what is the exact incriminating material available against the accused.
8. In a circumstantial evidence, case of the prosecution has to project the circumstances available and the same circumstances have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and there should be connection between the proven circumstances so as to unerringly indicate that the accused persons are the perpetrators in the crime that can be done during the course of evidence before the Court. At this stage, in my opinion petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following;
ORDER The Petitions are allowed. Consequently, the petitioners shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.315/2018 registered by Chitradurga Rural Police Station, for the offences under Sections *302, 201, 120B read with Section 149 of IPC & Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST(PA) Act., and Section 187 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One lakh only) each with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against them is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE GH * Corrected vide Court Order dated 21.08.2019.