IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4455 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SANDEEP Y S/O YELLAPPA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS OCC. BAR BINDING R/O HILHALANGE VILLAGE ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE (R) DISTRICT – 562 106 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI MANJUNATHA G., ADV.) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SURYANAGAR POLICE BANGALORE (R) DISTRICT – 562 106 REPRESENTED BY LEARNED SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI DILDAR SHIRALI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.201/2017 (SPL.C.NO.264/2017) OF SURYANAGAR P.S., BENGALURU RURAL FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 341, 302, 120B R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT..
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.201/2017 of Suryanagar police station. He was charge sheeted in the said case along with other accused for the offences punishable under Sections.143, 147, 148, 341, 302, 120B read with 149 of IPC and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST (POA) Act which is now pending in the Spl.C.No.264/2017 on the file of II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District.
2. It was alleged that due to some ill-will, on 31.05.2017 at 11.00 p.m. near Heelalige bus stop, the accused being members of unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons waylaid victim Harish when he was proceeding on his motor bike, assaulted him with chilli powder and knives, crushed his head and committed murder. This Court, rejected the earlier bail petition of the petitioner in Crl.P.No.5483/2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in Crl.P.Nos.7668/2018 and 525/2019, this Court has granted bail to accused No.2 who stands at the same footing, therefore, on the ground of parity the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail. According to the petitioner that is only changed circumstance.
4. Perusal of the order in those petitions do not indicate that the rejection of the petition of the petitioner is not brought to the notice of the Court while passing those orders. It was contended that eyewitness do not speak to the overt act of the petitioner. The copy of the statements of the eyewitness are produced. They speak the presence of the petitioner and the other accused. The eyewitnesses are purportedly stated that accused No.1 assaulted on the neck of the victim with long and the other accused stabbed the victim with knives.
5. External injury No.19 in post mortem report is to the following effect:
“19. Stab wound vertically placed – 3cm x 1cm x abdominal cavity deep. Present over back of right abdomen. Situated below the costal margin, upper end is sharp, lowered is blunt. Margins are clear cut. On further dissection of the wound it is observed that weapon after cutting the skin subcutaneous tissue. Muscle vessel has entered the abdominal cavity and has perforated liver through, through abdominal cavity contains about 700-800ml of blood. Wound is directed downwards and inwards. Back is filled with blood clots.”
6. Considering the merits of the matter only the earlier bail petition was rejected. In the order in Crl.P.Nos.7668/2018 and 525/2019 there is no mention to the earlier order of this Court in Crl.P.No.5483/2018 rejecting bail to the petitioner. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this is not a fit case to grant bail. Therefore, petition is rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE KG