IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8270/2017 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8271/2017 IN CRL.P.NO. 8270/2017 BETWEEN:
NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE MOTAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RAMPURA VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE WEST TALUK BANGALORE – 571501.
(BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR S., ADV., FOR SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA C.H., ADV.,) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HEBBAGODI P S ... PETITIONER (REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE – 01) (BY SRI.CHETAN DESAI, HCGP) ...RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.92/2017 OF HEBBAGODI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 302, 120(B), 52(A), 212 R/W 34 AND 149 IPC AND SEC. 3(2) (v) OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ARTOCITIES) ACT, 1989.
IN CRL.P.NO. 8271/2017 BETWEEN:
MURULI G @ APPU S/O GANGADHAR, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS RAMPURA VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE WEST TALUK BANGALORE – 571501.
(BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR S., ADV., FOR SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA C.H., ADV.,) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HEBBAGODI P S ... PETITIONER (REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE – 01) ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.CHETAN DESAI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.92/2017 OF HEBBAGODI P.S., BANGALORE DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 302, 120B, 52A, 212, 34 R/W 149 IPC AND SEC. 3(2) (5) OF SCHEDULE CAST AND SCHEDULE TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ARTOCITIES) ACT.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Since these two petitions are in respect of same crime and common questions of law and facts are involved in both these petitions, they are taken together to avoid repetition of discussion of law and facts and to dispose of them by this common order.
2. Crl.P.8270/2017 is filed by petitioner/accused No.8 and Crl.P.8271/2017 is filed by petitioner/accused No.9; both these petitions are filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120B, 52A , 212, 34 read with 149 of IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.92/2017.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State in respect of both the petitions.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petitions, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.
5. Looking to the materials, deceased is one Vasu @ Srinivas Prasad and the complainant is one Hariprasad @ Harish, who is the brother of the deceased, filed the complaint. As per the case of the prosecution, C.Ws.2 to 5 are the eye-witnesses to the incident. On the contrary, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there are no eye-witnesses to the incident, they are the witnesses planted by the prosecution. He filed the copy of the remand application dated 16.03.2017 and submitted that if at all they are the eye-witnesses and their statements were recorded, same could have been reflected in the remand application. Hence, he submitted that this itself shows that C.Ws.2 to 5 are planted witnesses by the prosecution. It is also his submission that there is no overt-act attributed against the petitioners. Even according to the version of the eye-witnesses, petitioners/accused Nos.8 and 9 held the lower limbs of the deceased Vasu and pulled him from the vehicle and thereby facilitated the other accused persons to assault and commit the murder, except this, there is no allegation against the petitioners herein.
6. This Court has already considered the bail petition of accused Nos.1, 7 and 10 in Crl.P.8335/2017 and enlarged them on bail. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Both these petitioners have contended that they have been falsely implicated in the case, they are not involved in the commission of alleged offence and they also undertaken to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. Looking to the Post-Mortem report, the cause of death of the deceased is due to multiple injuries sustained. Hence, I am of the opinion that these are the fit cases to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioners and to release them on bail.
7. Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed.
Petitioners/accused Nos.8 and 9 are ordered to be released on bail for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120B, 52A , 212, 34 read with 149 of IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.92/2017, subject to the following conditions:
i. Each petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and shall furnish one 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 BSR