IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL Crl.R.P. No. 1400/2018 BETWEEN :
1. Renuka W/o. Annaiah Aged about 48 years R/a. Konanuru Arakalagudu Taluk Hassan District – 573 130.
2. Arpitha D/o. Annaiah Aged about 26 years R/a. Konanuru Arakalagudu Taluk Hassan District – 573 130. … PETITIONERS (By Sri. Shiva Prasad S, Adv.) AND :
State by Thavarekere P.S.
Rep. by Special Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru – 560 001. … RESPONDENT (By Sri. S.T. Naik, HCGP) ---
This Crl.R.P. is filed under Section 397 r/w. Section 401 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to set aside the order dated 30.11.2018 passed in S.C. No. 187/2015 on the file of VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore etc.
This Crl.R.P. coming on for Admission this day, the Court passed the following;
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioners – Accused Nos. 2 and 3 assailing the order passed by the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, in S.C. No. 187/2015 dated 30.11.2018.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent – Station.
3. Though this matter is posted for admission, by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
4. Before going to consider the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I feel it just and proper to put forth the facts of the case as contended by the prosecution.
5. It is the contents of the complaint that accused No. 1 insisted the daughter of the complainant to love her and the said fact was informed by the daughter of the complainant to her parents. Elders and the parents of daughter of the complainant called accused No. 1 and properly advised him. In that context a case was also registered by the Police. Subsequently, with an intention to take revenge against the daughter of the complainant, accused No. 1 conspired with accused Nos. 2 and 3, hatched a plan, under the pretext of loving her took her and kept her in a house. When the daughter of the complainant was confined in the said house, with the aid and abatement of petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3, he sexually assaulted her repeatedly and thereafter committed her murder.
6. On the basis of the said complaint a case was registered and after investigation charge sheet has been filed. The accused appeared before the Sessions Court. After committal the petitioners - accused Nos. 2 and 3 filed an application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. to discharge them by contending that there is no material as against them. The trial Court after considering the material placed on record has dismissed the petition and being aggrieved by the same, petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 are before this Court.
7. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 that they are not residing along with accused No. 1. Petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 used to reside permanently at Konanuru village, Hassan district and accused No.1 used to reside at Bengaluru. There is no nexus between them. The learned counsel has also submitted that earlier, when the complaint was filed Section 114 was included and subsequently the same has not been included while filing the charge sheet. Though the charge sheet material shows that petitioners - accused Nos. 2 and 3 have conspired with accused No. 1, there is no material to connect the accused Nos. 2 and 3 to the alleged offence. On these grounds he submitted that the trial Court without considering these aspects of the matter has come to a wrong conclusion and has wrongly dismissed the application. Hence, he prays to allow the petition, set aside the impugned order and discharge petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 from the charges leveled against them.
8. Per contra, learned HCGP vehemently contended that the main allegation against petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 are that along with accused No. 1 they hatched a plan, conspired with accused No. 1 to see that under the pretext of marrying the daughter of complainant, take her and thereafter accused No. 1 will deal with her. There is material to show that the petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 have also conspired with accused No. 1. The alleged offence is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The trial Court after considering the facts and circumstances has come to a right conclusion and there are no grounds to interfere with the said order and he prays to dismiss the petition.
9. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. On close reading of the charge sheet material it is clear that the accused No. 1 and deceased were native of the same place and earlier a complaint was also registered when accused No. 1 pressurized the deceased to love her. Subsequently under the guise of loving her he took her and by conspiring with petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 he confined her in a house and thereafter he sexually assaulted and the alleged incident has taken place. The witnesses have also spoken that the daughter of the complainant used to tell the complainant over telephone about the ill treatment and harassment caused by accused No.1. Whether the conspiracy was there or not has to be considered only at the time of trial and when the prosecution produces its entire case before leading evidence. Prima facie, by seeing charge sheet material, it cannot be held that petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 have not conspired with accused No.1 and that there is no other activities in this behalf. Usually the conspiracy takes place within the four wall, it has to be proved with reference to the evidence going to be adduced by the prosecution. It is stated that at the instigation of A2 and A3, A1 use to ill-treat and harass. In that light there appears to be some prima facie material to frame the charge. Looking from any angle as the alleged offence is punishable with death or imprisonment for life it cannot be held at this juncture that petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 are not involved in the said crime. It is well settled principle of law that if the entire charge sheet material are scanned and scrutinized and if it is accepted in its face value and if no allegation or evidence or grave suspicion arises in this behalf, in such circumstances the Court can discharge the accused under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. In the instant case there is no suspicion about the non-involvement of the petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the alleged crime. Under such circumstances I feel that the trial Court after considering the entire material has come to a right conclusion. Hence, there is no merit in the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners – accused Nos. 2 and 3. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly it is dismissed.
10. In view of dismissal of the petition on merits, I.A. No. 1/2018 does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE.
LRS.