IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4354 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
NARAYANA K S/O. LATE ERANNA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT KANTHAIAHNAPALYA KOTHAGERE HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-89.
...PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRATHEEP K.C., ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY KUNIGAL POLICE STATION TUMKUR DISTRICT REP. BY ITS STATE PUBIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-01.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.289/2018 OF KUNIGAL POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302 & 201 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-state. Perused the records.
2. Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.
289/2018 for the offence punishable under sections 302 and 201 of IPC.
3. The factual matrix of the case are that the accused himself had been to the police station on 11.7.2018 at about 8.00 AM in the morning. He disclosed that on the previous night he had quarreled with his wife with reference to her illicit relationship with another person. Therefore, he assaulted her with a long wooden pestle (onake) and committed serious injuries to his wife. Her father also came to rescue her. The petitioner assaulted him and the said person also died due to the injuries sustained. Thereafter he straightaway went to the police station and disclosed the same.
4. There is no dispute that the petitioner and his wife were living together in the said house and it is the accused who has to explain as to what happened inside the house. Tentatively, he has gone to police station and informed the police about the incident and he actually set the criminal law into motion, on which basis investigation is done. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances, though there are no eye witnesses to the incident, it is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the petition is dismissed. However, petitioner is at liberty to move the court if there are any changed circumstance.
Sd/- JUDGE ckl/-