IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4031/2019 BETWEEN:
NAGARAJ V. S/O.CHINNAVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/A.NEAR MUTHYALAMMA TEMPLE A.K.COLONY 9TH CROSS, LINGARAJAPURA BENGALURU 560 072. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI .H.JAGADEESHA, ADV.) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANASWADI POLICE STATION BANGALORE 560 069.
REP. BY THEIR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BANGALORE 560001.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.566/2018 (S.C.No.426/2019) OF BANASWADI P.S., BANGALORE FOR OTHE OFFENCE P/U/S 302, 201 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. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as accused no.2 on the file of 45th Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge which is culminated into SC No.456/19.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that, the accused persons particularly accused nos. 1 and 2 were intending to marry the daughter of the deceased by name Shanthi of Lingarajapura. It is alleged that the said Shanthi was not willing to give her daughters to accused nos. 1 and 2 in marriage. In this regard, accused nos. 1 and 2 have had vengeance against the said lady. In order to remove the said lady and with an intention to marry the daughters of deceased, accused nos. 1 and 2, on 9.10.2018 at about 4.20 p.m. have taken the deceased in Autorikshaw to Arkavathi Layout Extension and there they have committed murder of the said lady by assaulting her with wooden piece and strangulated the neck of the deceased with a belt. Both accused nos. 1 and 2 as such have committed the murder of the deceased.
3. At the initial stages, the missing complaint was lodged so far as deceased is concerned and thereafter, the dead body of the .deceased was found after 10 days of the incident i.e. 20.10.2018 and investigation was taken. Accused nos. 1 and 2 were nabbed later. It is a case of circumstantial evidence.
4. The learned HCGP appearing for respondent- State has brought to the notice of this Court that there are two witnesses i.e. Prathap and Raju who have stated that they have seen accused nos. 1 and 2 going along with the deceased on 9.10.2018 and further there was recovery at the instance of accused no.1.
5. It is seen from the records that though the dead body was found on 20.10.2018, till that point of time, though knowing fully well that daughters of the deceased have suspected the murder, they have not disclosed the fact on 9.10.2018. Statement of these two witnesses were recorded on 14.10.2018 and 21.10.2018 on which day, they have stated that they came to know about the incident by accused themselves which amounts to extra-judicial confession on the part of the accused. These two circumstances in my opinion, have to be established beyond reasonable doubt during the course of trial along with motive factor as alleged. Extra- judicial confession itself is a weak piece of evidence that cannot be made a basis for rejection of bail petition.
6. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances of the case and, as charge sheet has already been filed against accused no.2 and he is in judicial custody, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following order:
Petition is allowed. The petitioner (accused no.2) shall be released on bail in connection with Cr.No.566/2018 (SC No.426/2019) on the file of Banasawadi Police, the XLV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore registered against him for the offences under Sections 302, 201 R/w.34 of IPC subject to the following conditions.
1. The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdiction court.
2. The petitioner shall not in any manner directly or indirectly, indulge in threatening or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
3. The petitioner shall not indulge in further committing or repeating any such offence or indulge in any criminal activities.
4. The petitioner shall appear before the trial court on all the future hearing dates unless exempted by the court. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission till the case registered against him is disposed off.
It is made clear that if any of the conditions stipulated above are violated; State is at liberty to move for cancellation of bail before the concerned committal or trial court as the case may be.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sk/-