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

Manjunath vs The State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|23 October, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3532 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
MANJUNATH S/O LATE DEVARAJ AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/AT SEETHAPURA KAVALU GATE DUGLAPURA TARIKERE TALUK CHIKKAMANGALUR DISTRICT-577101 (BY SRI. PRATHEEP K.C., ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY TARIKERE POLICE CHIKKAMANGALUR DISTRICT REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-01 (BY SRI. HONNAPPA, HCGP) ...PETITIONER …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.241/2018 OF TARIKERE TOWN POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 201, 302, 396, 120(B), 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION 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-state. Perused the records.
2. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.4 in the charge sheet filed by the respondent-police for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 396, 120(B) read with Section 149 IPC. After committal, sessions case is registered in S.C. No. 8/2019 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the accused 1 to 6 hatched a conspiracy for wrongful gain to do away with the life of a lady by name Shanthamma, wife of Manjunatha who was running a petty shop at Shivapura Kavalu Grama in Tarikere Taluk. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, particularly on 17.8.2018 in the night hours at about 11.00 PM they went near the petty shop of the said Shanthamma and tapped the door and the deceased Shanthamma opened the door for the purpose of selling coconut. When she went inside for the purpose of counting the coconut and came, at that time accused No.1 caught hold of her and covered her mouth with clothes, accused Nos. 2 and 3 caught hold of her hands and accused Nos. 4 and 5 caught hold of her legs, and accused No.1 assaulted on the left side ear of the deceased Shanthamma with cement piece. It is also alleged that after committing the murder of the said lady, all the accused persons have taken away the gold and silver articles as well as cash to the extent of Rs.80,000/-.
4. There are eye witnesses to the incident and further I find recovery and entire case is based on proof. The allegation against this petitioner during the course of investigation is that an amount of Rs.5,000/- and two pairs of ankle chains have been recovered. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances, when the entire case revolves on recovery, recovery has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt during full dressed trial and accused No.6 has already been released on bail, in my opinion the petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on conditions, as there are no previous antecedents reported against this petitioner and that he is an anti social element or any case is pending against him. Hence, the following : -
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 241/2018 of Tarikere Town Police Station, (S.C. No. 8/2019 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur), registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 396, 120(B) read with Section 149 IPC subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lakh only) with one solvent surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional court on all the future hearing dates unless exempted by the court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ckl
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

Manjunath vs The State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
23 October, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra