IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.369/2019 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.370/2019, CRIMINAL PETITION NO.427/2019 AND CRIMINAL PETITION NO.471/2019 IN CRL.P.NO.369/2019 BETWEEN 1. NAGARAJ V AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O LATE VARADAPPA, 2. SHASTRI N AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, S/O NAGARAJ V, BOTH ARE R/AT U-7, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN, HANUMANTHAPURA, SRIRAMPURAM, BENGALURU-560 021. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.T. NANAIAH, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI M.R.C. MANOHAR, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, REPT. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.H.S. CHANDRAMOULI, SPP ) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.241/2018 OF SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 448, 148, 324, 307, 506B, 427, 395, 354, 212, 120B, 201 R/W 149 OF IPC. IN CRL.P.NO.370/2019 BETWEEN GANDHI N AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, S/O NAGARAJ.V R/AT U-34, 4TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, SWATHANTHRAPALYA, SRIRAMPURAM, BENGALURU-560 021. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.T.NANAIAH, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. M.R.C MANOHAR, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.H.S. CHANDRAMOULI, SPP ) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.241/2018 OF SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 448, 148, 324, 307, 506-B, 427, 395, 354 R/W 149 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.NO.427/2019 BETWEEN SRI. SARAVANA S/O LOKANATH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/AT NO.U-94, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, SWATANTHRAPALYA, SRIRAMPURA, BENGALURU-560 021. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.V.PRAKASHA, ADVOCATE) AND STATE BY SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU REP BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.H.S. CHANDRAMOULI, SPP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.241/2018 OF SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 448, 148, 324, 307, 506(B), 427, 395, 354 R/W 149 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.NO.471/2019 BETWEEN SRI MOSES S/O PRAKASHA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, R/AT ASHRAYA HOUSE, NEAR MUNESWARA TEMPLE, VEERASAGARA MAIN ROAD, ATUUR LAYOUT, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN, BENGALURU-560 026. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.V.PRAKASHA, ADVOCATE) AND STATE BY SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.H.S. CHANDRAMOULI, SPP ) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.241/2018 OF SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S. 448, 148, 324, 307, 506(B), 427, 395, 354 R/W 149 OF IPC.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Criminal Petition No.369/2019 has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 namely, Nagaraj V. and Shastri N. Criminal Petition No.427/2019 has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.4 namely, Sri. Saravana. Criminal Petition No.471/2019 has been filed by the petitioner/accused No. 5 namely, Sri. Moses under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to release them on bail and Criminal Petition No.370/2019 has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 namely, Gandhi N. under Section 438 of Cr.P.C to release him on anticipatory bail in Cr.No.241/2018 of Srirampura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 148, 324, 307, 506(B), 427, 395, 354, 212, 120(B), 201 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned Senior counsel Sri. M.T.Nanaiah and the learned counsel Sri K.V.Prakasha appearing for the petitioners and the learned State Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the petitioner/accused No.1 is the brother of V.Dharma, who is the father of first informant. The house No.168 situated in 2nd Cross, 2nd Main, Hanumanthapura, Srirampura, Bengaluru was owned by V. Dharma and it was transferred to the name of his wife and daughter. Part of the property was given to the tenants, in some of the part, the complainant and her mother were in possession. It is further alleged that the petitioners were trying to evict the complainant and her mother from that house in order to get the property. They also gave threat in this behalf. The mother of the complainant also filed a complaint, the petitioners/accused persons were arrested and got released on bail. It is further alleged that on 25.11.2018 at about 5.00 a.m., the petitioners/accused persons and their henchmen trespassed to the house of victim, assaulted the complainant Shwetha and her mother with long, machete and other dangerous weapons with an intention to commit murder. By hearing hue and cry, the tenant Jayalakshmi came there and she was also assaulted by the accused persons by lethal weapons. Therefore, the complainant and her mother were shifted to Victoria Hospital. At present, the complainant is taking treatment at Priya Nursing Home and Jayalakshmi is taking treatment at K.C.General Hospital. On the basis of the complaint a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of learned Senior counsel for the petitioners/accused persons that a civil disputes were pending between the petitioners and the mother of the complainant. The complainant has also filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Police and no action has been taken in this behalf. He further submitted that when the injured were taken to the hospital, the history given was assaulted by three known people with dragger and hammer. Though the victims were knowing the accused persons and they were well acquainted with the victims, their name has not been mentioned. He further submitted that the said records shows that the three known persons have assaulted them. Subsequently, eight persons have been included in the said case, that itself clearly goes to show that a false complaint has been registered against the petitioners/accused persons. He further submitted that even the petitioner/accused No.1, when he was produced before the Court, he has specifically stated about ill treatment and harassment by the Police when he was in custody, the same has been recorded. He further submitted that the names of the petitioners/accused persons have not been mentioned. The injuries which have been sustained by the victim-complainant, itself clearly goes to show that the petitioners/accused persons were not having any intention to cause the death of the complainant. He further submitted that because of the civil disputes, a false case has been registered against the petitioners/accused persons. He further submitted that by filing an affidavit of Smt. N.Lakshmi-wife of accused No.1, to the effect that the injured Jayalakshmi got admitted to Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru for treatment and after three days, she was shifted to K.C.General Hospital and she was discharged after a month. She was suffering from Chronic Diabetics. It is further stated in the affidavit that after about 15 days of the incident, both the complainant and her mother took a rented house in Kuppam so that, they can avoid civil proceedings for eviction of the house at Srirampura. It was informed to their neighbours that they were staying in Kuppam and out of danger. It is further submitted that the Police were very much eager to see that the petitioners/accused persons were not released on bail and languishing in jail itself. It is further submitted that though it is contended that the rowdy sheet has been opened in respect of the petitioners/accused persons, but in all other cases, the petitioners/accused persons have been acquitted but one case has been posted for judgment, therein also there is likelihood of the petitioners/accused persons being acquitted. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by the conditions imposed on them by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petitions and to release the petitioners/accused persons on bail.
5. Per contra, learned State Public Prosecutor vehemently argued and submitted that the civil disputes are pending between the petitioners and mother of the complainant. As many as 54 cases have been registered as against petitioners/accused persons. He further submitted that while considering the bail application, conduct, attitude and criminal antecedents of the accused persons have to be taken into consideration. If the said release is going to cause nuisance in the society, then under such circumstances, the accused persons are not entitled to be released on bail. He further submitted that earlier this Court, while passing the order in Criminal Petition No.5853/2017 dated 21.09.2017 undertaking was given by learned counsel for the petitioners to the effect that even if a single complaint is made against them, the Court may cancel the bail, that itself clearly goes to show that the petitioners/accused persons are having criminal antecedents. He further submitted that there are eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and if the petitioners/accused persons are released on bail, they may again indulge in similar type of criminal activities. He further submitted that by filing a memo to the effect that the complainant and her mother are admitted in Priya Nursing Home at Kuppam and still they are under treatment in the said hospital and they are not out of danger. He further submitted that the charge sheet is not yet filed and still the investigation is under progress and at this premature stage, if the petitioners/accused persons are released on bail, then the case might get affected. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petitions.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the contents of the complaint and other material it clearly goes to show that there were some civil disputes pending between the parties and even there was a threat given by the petitioners/accused persons to the victims and a complaint was also registered in this behalf with the Commissioner of Police, that is the matter which has to be considered and appreciated only at the time of trial. It is alleged in the complaint that on 25.11.2018 at about 5.00 a.m., the petitioner and their henchmen trespassed into the house of the victims and assaulted the complainant and her mother and thereafter, by hearing hue and cry, the tenant- Jayalakshmi came there, the accused persons also assaulted her and she was also admitted in the hospital. Whether the petitioners/accused persons have committed heinous offence, which is likely to be caused the death of the injured or her mother, that has to be decided only when the injured gets discharged from the hospital. The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused persons submitted by saying that already the injured has been discharged from the hospital and they are out of danger. The learned SPP submitted that the said injured persons are not yet discharged and they are still undergoing treatment and as such the order was passed directing the Registrar to get report of the said submissions. In view of the said order, the learned SPP has filed a memo dated 23.04.2019 along with the report of Dr.M.Kranthi Kumar, Ms Ortho, Truma, Spine and Joint Replacement Surgeon of Sri Priya Nursing Home, Kuppam, has specifically stated that Mrs.Chamundeshwari and Mrs.Swetha have been admitted and had undergone treatment in their hospital. Even, the records have also been produced to show that the said injured were admitted and took treatment in hospital on 09.02.2019.
8. Under such facts and circumstances, by going through the contents of the complaint and other materials, there are specific overt acts as against the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 and even the complaint also discloses the fact that they have assaulted the injured persons with lethal weapons.
9. Under such facts and circumstances, charge sheet has not yet been filed and the injured persons have not been discharged from the hospital. There is specific overt acts. Apart from that in so far as accused Nos.1 to 3 are concerned. As could be seen from the records, Criminal Petition No.5853/2017 dated 21.09.2017 in respect of accused Nos.1 to 3, a special order has been passed to the effect that they should not involve in any such type of criminal activities and if they again involve and if a single complaint has made against them, the trial Court is at liberty to cancel the bail. Keeping in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that it is not a fit case to release the petitioners/accused Nos. 1 to 3 on bail till the injured persons are discharged from the hospital. In so far as, the petitioners/accused Nos.4 and 5 are concerned, there are no serious overt acts alleged as against them in the involvement of the offence and the offences alleged against the petitioners/accused Nos.4 and 5 are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
10. Accordingly, Criminal Petition Nos.
427/2019 and 471/2019 are allowed and petitioners-accused Nos.4 and 5 namely, Sri.
Saravana and Sri. Moses are ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.241/2018 of Srirampura Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 148, 324, 307, 506(B), 427, 395, 354 read with Section 149 of IPC subject to the following conditions:-
1. Each of the petitioners-accused Nos.4 and 5 namely, Sri. Saravana and Sri. Moses shall execute 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. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission.
3. They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
4. They shall regularly appear before the Court for trial.
5. They shall mark their attendance before the Jurisdictional Police on first of every month between 10:00 a.m and 5:00 p.m till the chargesheet is filed.
6. They shall not indulge in similar type of criminal activities. In the event of they violating any of the above conditions, then under such circumstances, the trial Court is at liberty to cancel the bail.
Accordingly, Criminal Petition Nos.369/2019 filed by the accused Nos.1 and 3 namely, Nagaraj V. and Shastri N., and 370/2019 filed by accused No.2 namely, Gandhi N., respectively are dismissed.
However, accused Nos.1 to 3 namely, Nagaraj V., Gandhi N. and Shastri N. are at liberty to apply for a regular bail application after the discharge of the injured persons from the hospital. The observations made in this order shall not come in the way of the trial Court while considering the such application.
NR/-
Sd/- JUDGE