IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
Criminal Petition No.8889 of 2017 c/w Criminal Petition No.9479 of 2017 In Criminal Petition No.8889/2017 Between:
Revana Siddappa @ Revanna @ Reva S/o Lokesh Aged bout 21 years, R/o Near Sollapuramma Temple, Nayandahalli, Mysore Road, Bengaluru – 560 039.
(By Sri.A.N.Radha Krishna, Advocate) And State of Karnataka By Rajarajeswarinagara Police Bengaluru City.
(By Sri.Chetan Desai, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.196/2017 of Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.
In Criminal Petition No.9479/2017 Between: Manjula W/o Late Kantharaju, Aged about 36 years.
Permanently R/a No.71, Kanamanahalli Village, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara Dist – 562 117.
... Petitioner (By Sri.Diwakara K, Advocate) And State of Karnataka By Rajarajeswarinagara Police Bengaluru City.
(By Sri.Chetan Desai, HCGP) ... Respondent This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.196/2017 of Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.
These petitions coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:
ORDER Since these two petitions are in respect of the same Crime Number and since common question of law and fact is involved, they are taken up together for disposal by this common order.
2. The first petition Crl.P.NO.8889/2017 is filed by petitioner-accused No.2 and the connected petition Crl.P.No.9479/2017 is filed by petitioner-accused No.4. Both the petitions are filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking their release on bail for the alleged offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC registered by the respondent police in Crime No.196/2017.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for respective petitioner Nos.2 and 4 and the learned HCGP for respondent state.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, chargesheet material and other materials produced in the case. One Umesh, brother of the deceased filed a complaint in respect of the death of his brother Kantharaju, wherein, it is stated that deceased was earlier working as security guard in Global College. Subsequently, he was addicted to drinking alcohol. So he gave up the job. Then the family members were making an attempt to take him to some persons to advise him to discontinue the drinking habit. The materials also go to show that on 07.08.2017 at about 5.17 a.m, accused No.1 Abhishek phoned the complainant informing that Kantharaju has expired and when they came and saw the dead body of the deceased, there were injuries on the face and blood was soaking on the ground. There were also injuries on the head, nose and blood was coming from the mouth of the deceased. It goes to show that he was murdered during the night of 07.08.2017. When accused No.1 was enquired in this regard, he told that day before Kantharaju was brought back by accused No.2 Revanna on his bike and even he has not given proper answer. Therefore, it is mentioned in the said complaint that accused No.1 was having enmity towards deceased because he has not stopped drinking habit, because of that reason with an intention to eliminate the deceased, accused No.1 with the help of accused No.2 threw stone on the head of the deceased and thereby they have committed the murder. Hence, he has requested the police to take action in this connection. On the basis of the said incident, FIR came to be registered only on accused Nos.1 and 2 herein. During the course of investigation that too based on the voluntary statement of accused No.1, accused Nos.4 and 3 were also arrayed as accused in the said case. The prosecution material, so far as accused No.4 is concerned, go to show that she has been arrayed as one of the accused based on the voluntary statement given by accused No.1 and the materials go to show that the overt-act attributed against accused No.4 is that she assaulted deceased with upper limb, except that there is no other allegation. Regarding another petitioner Revanna is concerned, the prosecution material go to show, as per the statement of CW 4 Mutturaju that, deceased was seen in the company of accused Nos.1 and 2 and they went to the bar. The material also go to show that it is accused Nos.1 and 2 who have thrown the stone which was lying and the material also go to show that as far as accused No.2 is concerned, he tied the deceased Kantharaju with lungi and thereby facilitated accused No.1 to throw the stone on the head of the deceased Kantharaju.
5. I have also perused the post-mortem report and the Doctor who conducted autopsy has given the opinion that death is because of the crush injury to the head. Looking to the prosecution material at this stage, I am of the opinion so far as the petitioner-accused No.2 is concerned that there is prima-facie material collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation about the involvement in committing the alleged offence. Therefore, he is not entitled for release on bail. Accordingly, bail petition filed by accused No.2 is hereby rejected.
6. So far as petitioner accused No.4 is concerned, as I have already observed, only allegation is that she has assaulted the deceased with upper limb. She is a women aged 36 years and she has undertaken to abide by any reasonable condition imposed by this Court. Investigation is complete and charge sheet is filed. The second petition filed by petitioner-accused No.4-Manjula is allowed. The petitioner-accused No.4- Manjula is ordered to be released on bail for the alleged offences, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and shall furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/- Judge dn/-