IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3297/2017 AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.7970/2017 IN CRL.P.NO.3297/2017 BETWEEN:
1. MUTHURAJU.K S/O LATE KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT AJJAPPANAHALLI KASABA HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK TUMAKURU-572220.
2. HARISH.A S/O SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT AJJAPPANAHALLI KASABA HOBLI TUMAKURU TALUK TUMAKURU-572220 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI PRADEEP.C.S., ADV.) AND:
STATE BY TUMKUR RURAL CIRCLE POLICE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560001. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP.) THIS CRL.P. FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.262/2016 OF TUMKURU RURAL P.S., TUMKURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 148, 147, 427, 341, 302 READ WITH 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1) (X) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT. (C.C.NO.25245/2017) OF HULIMAVU P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302, 201 READ WITH 34 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.NO.7970/2017 BETWEEN:
NARASARAJU @ KOTHARI S/O NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT AJJAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE BESIDE GOVERNMENT SCHOOL SWANDENAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR-572101. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI PRADEEP.C.S., ADV.) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY TUMKURU RURAL POLICE HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560001. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP.) THIS CRL.P. FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME No.262/2016 OF TUMKUR RURAL POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU AND SPL.C.NO.44/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 427, 341, 302 AND 120B READWITH 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3 CL. (2) (V) OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (POA) ACT, 1989.
THESE CRL.Ps COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Since these two petitions are in respect of the same crime number and common questions of facts and law are involved, both the petitions are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common order in order to avoid repetition of discussion of facts and law.
2. The first petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.9 and 10 and connected petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.11. Both the petitions are under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking to release the petitioners on regular bail of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 341, 427 read with Section 149 of IPC and also Section 3(1) (X) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and charge sheet came to be filed for the offence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 341, 427, 120B and Section 3(2) (5) (5a) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.9, 10 and 11 in respect of both the petitions, so also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record produced in the case.
5. The prosecution case in brief are;
As per the complaint, one Lakshmamma who is said to be wife of the deceased Lakshmikantha, on 21.10.2019 at about 9 a.m., along with her husband, proceeded to Tumakuru for the purpose of purchasing vegetables and flowers in a Bolero Car, while returning, they reached Swandenahalli near Tumakuru Road, at that time, a white color car blocked their movement and they saw Mr.Ramakrishnappa of their village holding Machchu, getting down from the said car and his son who was driving the car Jayaram @ Jaya also got down by holding long in their hands. Sons of Ramakrishnappa namely, Raghu and Ramesha who were also holding Machchu and sticks got down from the vehicle and came towards their vehicle. Another red color car came from the back side blocking the way and from the said vehicle, another son of Ramakrishnappa namely Chandra @ Channi and sons of Puttaiah namely Rudra and Bhadra and son of Giddappa namely Nagaraja @ Naga and others got down holding sticks in their hands and came near their car and seeing them, her husband got terrified and got down from the vehicle and started running towards Hulluraiah’s land and they chased and murdered her husband. On the basis of said complaint, case came to be registered for the said offence.
6. Perusing the complaint averments which has filed originally by Lakshmamma, names of these petitioners i.e., accused Nos.9, 10 and 11 are not at all figured either in the complaint or in the FIR but subsequently on 26.10.2016 after lapse of 5 days, she gave her further statement. In her further statement, she stated that she came to know through conversation with other persons that these three petitioners i.e., accused Nos.9, 10 and 11 were also present and participated in the assault. But at the same time, she also mentioned in the further statement that some 5-6 accused persons, whose names are mentioned in the further statement stated that that they were not present in the incident. So at this stage, it goes to show that the complainant herself is not definite about the persons who actually participated in the alleged assault and so far as the petitioners are concerned, their names are not mentioned in the original complaint. It is only after lapse of 5-6 days, that too in the further statement, their names came to be mentioned.
7. Careful consideration of the materials goes to show that the complainant through conversation with other persons came to know about the involvement of these three petitioners. The petitioners have denied the allegations made as against them contending that there is false implication and they are innocent and not at all participated in the alleged act and they are ready to abide by any reasonable conditions. Now, the investigation is completed and charge sheet also filed. Hence, in my opinion, it is a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner Nos.9, 10 and 11.
6. Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed.
Petitioner/accused Nos.9, 10 and 11 are ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.262/2016, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioners have to execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and has to furnish one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioners have to appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/- JUDGE NC.