IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4356/2019 BETWEEN:
Manjunathachari K.V. @ Manja, S/o. late Veerabhadrachari, Aged about 34 years, R/at, Karadihalli Village, Kanakatte Hobli, Arasikere Taluk, Hassan District – 572301. …Petitioner (By Sri. Pratheep K.C., Advocate) AND The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Banakal Police Chikkamagalur District. …Respondent (By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.67/2018 (S.C.No.88/2018) of Banakal Police Station, Chikkamagaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition is coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to release him on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.67/2018 (S.C.No.88/2018) of Banakal Police Station, Chikkamagaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 13.04.2018, the complainant was coming from Mangalore in an ambulance he saw the dead body in the Charmudi Ghat at a depth level of 100 feet. When he saw the dead body, it was around the age of 50 to 55 years old and it was folded with the bed sheet. On the basis of the said complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 that already accused Nos. 2 and 3 have been released on bail and on the ground of parity, the petitioner/accused No.1 is also entitled to be released on bail.
5. It is his further submission that entire case rests on circumstantial evidence. The last seen theory put forth by the prosecution is also not substantiating the case of the prosecution. Even the family members are also suspecting the deceased as he was a vagabond. He use to consume alcohol and he is also used to go away from the house. The petitioner/accused No.1 is innocent and no serious overt act has been alleged as against him. Further he submits that the recovery has been made with all the accused persons. Charge sheet has been filed and he is ready to abide by any conditions this Court may impose and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and release the petitioner on bail.
6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the statement of CW-7 and 8 clearly goes to show that the petitioner/accused No.1 and accused Nos. 2 and 3 were seen along with the deceased while closing the shop and going to their residence. Thereafter, the deceased was not found. There was a strong assumption that it is the accused No.1 who has committed the alleged offence. It is his further submission that accused/petitioner has also participated in the alleged crime along with accused Nos. 2 and 3. He assaulted on the chest of the deceased and when he fell down, at that time by using the pillow accused No.1 smothered the deceased. Thereafter the body has been thrown in Charmudi Ghat. He submitted that if petitioner/accused No.1 is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with prosecution witnesses. Hence on these grounds he prayed to dismiss the petition.
7. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and perused the records.
8. As could be seen from the records the entire case rests on circumstantial evidence. Even this Court by considering the said circumstances in Criminal Petition No. 1052/2019 connected with Criminal Petition No.894/2019 dated 24.04.2019 has already released accused Nos. 2 and 3 on bail. In those criminal petitions, it has been observed that the prosecution has mainly relying upon two circumstances i.e., last seen theory and recovery of vehicle which belongs to accused -1. Even according to the last seen theory, witnesses have also not specifically stated with regard to deceased and the accused proceeding together. In this behalf, even the last seen theory is also appearing vague and weak type of evidence. Except that circumstance, no strong circumstances are there. The voluntary statement of accused cannot be accepted except under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Under such facts and circumstances, by imposing stringent conditions, if the petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on bail I feel that it meets the ends of justice. Hence, the petition is allowed.
Petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No. 67/2018 (S.C. No.88/2018) of Banakal Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner/accused No.1 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 tamper with the prosecution evidence either directly or indirectly.
3. HE shall not indulge in similar type of criminal activities till the trial is concluded.
4. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
5. Respondent-police is at liberty to move for cancellation of bail, if there is any interference by the petitioner/accused No.1 during the course of investigation.
Sd/- JUDGE BVK