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

Mohan Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|31 October, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO. 7489/2019 BETWEEN MOHAN KUMAR S/O SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/O BHEEMAPURA VILLAGE SHIVANAPURA POST – 562 122 NANDAGUDI HOBLI HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. J.R. MOHAN, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BENGALURU – 560 001 THROUGH HEBBAL POLICE … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ROHITH B.J., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.153/2019 REGISTERED BY HEBBAL POLICE STATION , BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/Ss. 304-II, 304-A AND 337 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the Respondent–State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.7 in Crime No.153/2019 of Hebbal Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 304-II, 304-A and 337 r/w Section 34 of IPC, which is now pending before the Court of I Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru City.
3. The allegations made against this petitioner (A7) in brief are that, the complainant and her husband have been residing at Bhuvaneshwari Nagar in Bengaluru City. They had a daughter by name Reethanya, aged 5 years, studying in LKG in PUS School, L.R. Bande. Beside the house of the complainant, there is a vacant site of one Muniyappa, who rented out that site to one Ashok Reddy and his father R. Hanumantha Reddy and they were carrying on retail business of sand, brick and jelly. In that context, On 10.09.2019, at about 12.30 p.m. when the complainant and her husband and their daughter Reethanya and the complainant’s brother Sagay Raj were in the house, at that time, a lorry bearing No.KA.03.A.549 while unloading the sand, when taking the lorry backwards, the lorry dashed against the back wall of the house of the complainant, due to which the wall collapsed and the sand and wall bricks were fell on the complainant, her husband, her daughter Reethanya and her brother and her daughter Reethanya was covered with sand and bricks and she sustained injury on her head, backside, hand and legs and she was unconscious. Though, she was immediately shifted to the Dr. Ambedkar Hospital at about 12.30 p.m., but, the Doctor said that she was brought dead.
4. On the above said allegations, a complaint was lodged against the driver and owner of the lorry, the owner of the site and the persons who are the sellers of sand etc.
5. The petitioner is alleged to be the cleaner of the said lorry and there is no mention that he was present at the time of the alleged incident. The incident in question has occurred mainly on the negligence of the lorry driver while taking the lorry reverse.
6. It is submitted that the petitioner has already arrested and after interrogation, he was remanded to judicial custody. Whether the offence falls under Section 304-A or 304 Part II of IPC, invoked by the police is doubtful and that aspect has to be thrashed-out during the full dressed trial. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly under Section 439 of Cr.PC., the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following,-
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner (A7)-Mohan Kumar shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.153/2019 of Hebbal Police Station registered against him for the aforesaid offences now pending before the Court of I Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru City, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all 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, till the case registered against him is disposed of.
vi) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week ie., on every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet or for a period of two months, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE KGR*
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

Mohan Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
31 October, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra