IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9600/2018 Between:
Sathish @ Paapa, S/o. Kendaiah, Aged about 23 years, R/at Hosororudoddi Village, Dodda Malooru Hobli, Channapatna Taluk, Ramanagara District, Pin code-244 715. ... Petitioner (By Sri M.R.Nanjundagowda, Adv., for Sri Ramesha H.N, Adv.,) And:
The State of Karnataka, By Maddur Police Station, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.248/2017 (S.C.No.1/2018) of Maddur P.S., Mandya District for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 109, 120B read with Section 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.248/2017 (S.C.No.1/2018) of Maddur P.S., Mandya District for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 109, 120B read with 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 07.05.2017, the marriage of Shilpa (accused No.2) was performed with deceased Renukaprasad. It is the further case of Prosecution that prior to her marriage, she was in love with petitioner-accused No.1. On 10.06.2018, accused No.2 instigated accused No.1 to eliminate her husband – the deceased Renukaprasad and in view of the same, accused No.2 gave a sum of Rs.1,000/- and a gold ring to accused No.1. Thereafter, on 12.06.2017, the accused No.1 conspired with accused Nos.3 and 4 and took the deceased Renukaprasad near Byrapatna Colony Railway Gate and committed his murder during the night of 13.06.2017 and threw the body into the ditch. In view of the same, a case was registered in Crime No.248/2017 on the next day, i.e. on 14.06.2017.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 that petitioner/accused No.1 approached this Court in Criminal Petition No.4601/2018 and the said petition was came to be dismissed on 11.09.2018. The petitioner/accused No.1 was apprehended on 16.06.2017 and no progress has been made in the case, since from two years two months he is languishing in jail and even there is no hope of concluding the trial at an early stage. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail.
5. It is the contention of the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioner/accused No.1 has approached this Court earlier and this Court after considering the merits of the case has rejected the bail petition. There are no changed circumstances to reconsider the bail application. He further submitted that already the charge sheet has been framed and the trial is yet to be commenced. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records and this Court by considering the merits of the case has dismissed the petition on 11.09.2018. Only because as the trial has not yet commenced and the petitioner/accused No.1 is languishing in jail for a period of two years two months is not a good grounds to reconsider the bail application.
7. In that light, the petitioner/accused No.1 has not made out any good grounds to allow the petition. Hence, the petition is dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial expeditiously with an outer limit of eight months from the receipt of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE GJM/RG