Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Madesh @ Chetan Gowda

High Court Of Karnataka|10 December, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K N PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7643 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
MADESH @ CHETAN GOWDA, S/O SHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS DODDAKAMMANAHALLI, BEGUR HOBLI, ANEKAL TLAUK, BENGLAURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560068. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI HEGDE RAMAKRISHNA S, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TALAGHATPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU – 01.
2. SRI. RAMAPPA, S/O ANJANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OPP. PILEKAMMA TEMPLE, KALENA AGRAHARA, GOTTIGERE POST, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU 560083. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ROHITH B.J, ADVOCATE) **** THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF THE CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.266/2018 OF THALAGHATTAPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143,144,147,148,120-B, 302, 149 OF IPC, 1860 AND U/S 27 OF ARMS ACT AND U/S 3(2) AND 5(a) OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The notice issued to respondent No.2 is said to have been served as per the submission of the learned High Court Government Pleader. Hence service of notice on respondent No.2-Complainant is held sufficient.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 in Crime No.266/2018 of respondent police for the offence under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 120B, 302, 149 of IPC and under Section 27 of the ARMS Act, 1959 and under Section 3(2)(5a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance 2014. The police after thorough investigation has laid charge sheet and a special case has been registered in Special C. No.558/2018 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru.
3. The case of the prosecution is that one Ramappa, father of the deceased lodged a complaint against the petitioner and other accused stating that the deceased Harisha had married one Vanishree about ten years ago and they were blessed with two children. The deceased had developed an illicit relationship with one Manjula, who is none other than the sister of accused Nos.1 and 2. Because of this illicit relationship there were frequent altercations between the deceased and his wife. In this regard it is alleged that on 19.09.2018 when the complainant was in the house, friends of the complainant informed about the murder of the deceased. Immediately the complainant went to the spot and saw the dead body. Thereafter lodged a complaint against the petitioner and others. During the course of investigation the police have investigated that accused Nos.1 and 2 had motive to do away with the life of the deceased. The accused Nos.1 and 2 have taken the assistance of accused Nos.3 and 4 to commit the murder of the deceased.
4. The entire case revolves around the circumstantial evidence. There are no eye witnesses to the incident. Except some recovery at the instance of the accused persons nothing worth is elicited, except their voluntary statement. It is alleged that this petitioner has used a chopper for assaulting the deceased on his head. The said chopper was sticked on to the head of the deceased which was seized by the police on the spot. No blood stained clothes alleged to have been recovered from this petitioner.
5. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances, when the entire case revolves around circumstantial evidence, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Apart from the above, the other accused persons i.e., accused Nos.2, 4 and 5 have already been released on bail by this Court in Crl.P.Nos.1521/2019, 5874/2019 and 5724/2019 on different dates and they also stand on the same footing as that of the petitioner. Therefore, on the ground of parity also the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the same conditions. Hence the following:
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.1 shall be released on bail in Cr.No.266/2018 of Thalaghatpura Police Station, Bengaluru for the alleged offences subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
(ii) The petitioner shall co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, it will result in cancellation of bail.
Sd/- JUDGE ykl
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Madesh @ Chetan Gowda

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
10 December, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra