IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.1657/2019 Between:
Baiyanna, S/o Late Vijayappa, Aged about 35 years, Residing at Makanahalli, Vagata Agrahara Post, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District – 562 114. … Petitioner (By Sri Ravichandra T.C., Advocate) And:
State by Thirmalashettihalli Police Station.
(Represented by Learned Public Prosecutor), High Court Building, Bangalore – 560 001. … Respondent (By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.143/2018 (Spl. C.C. No.532/2018) of Thirumalashetty Halli Police Station, Bangalore Rural District for the offences p/u/s 302, 201 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(V), 3(1)(r)(s) (w) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER Notice issued to the complainant (father of the deceased) has been served.
2. The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.143/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC read with Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w) and Sections 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that initially a complaint was lodged against unknown persons in light of the recovery of dead body of a woman aged about 27 years. Subsequently, during the course of investigation, it was found that deceased was living with accused No.2 and father of the deceased had expressed suspicion of involvement of accused No.2 in the murder of his daughter. It is stated that accused No.2 was arrested and in his voluntary statement has implicated that accused No.1 as being involved in the commission of offence.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and the case that is made out in the charge sheet is only on the basis of the voluntary statement of accused No.2 and that the said voluntary statement is to be proved during trial and cannot be taken note of.
5. Taking note of the fact that case rests on circumstantial evidence and that the motive even as per the version in the charge sheet is only as regards accused No.2 and that recovery is also at the instance of accused No.2, a case is made out to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
6. It is to be noted that the present proceedings relating to bail cannot be construed to be the proceedings for punishment. The evidentiary value to be attached to voluntary statement of co-accused is a matter to be proved during trial. It is also to be noted that prosecution case makes out the motive only as regards accused No.2 as regards the commission of crime. It is noticed that the petitioner is in custody since 6.8.2018.
7. The Sessions Court has dismissed the petition seeking enlargement of bail observing that there were criminal antecedents. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner points out that there are no criminal antecedents and in fact, a case seems to have been transferred and hence, on mistaken assumption the Sessions Court has observed that there is another case that is pending against the petitioner.
8. In the light of the above, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.143/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC read with Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w) and Sections 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE VGR