Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Mr Shankarappa @ Sahukar Shankarappa vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|09 October, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.6246/2019 BETWEEN:
Mr.Shankarappa @ Sahukar Shankarappa, S/o Munivenkatappa, Aged about 56 years, R/at No.29, Mochipallya, Bangarpet Road, Kolar District-563101. …Petitioner (By Sri. C.R.Bhaskar, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By Avalahalli Police, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore.
Rep.by State Public Prosecutor High Court Building, Bengaluru - 560 001. …Respondent (By Sri. Honnappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.355/2018 of Avalahalli Police Station, Bengaluru District for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 465, 471, 419, 420 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 in S.C.No.47/2019 (arising out of Cr.No.355/2018) for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 465, 471, 419, 420 of IPC.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the accused No.1 has been doing the real estate business and he has been in the habit of creating documents in collusion with various persons in respect of the lands where the whereabouts of the owners of such lands were not known. In this backdrop, it is alleged that Sy.No.52 of Nimbekayipura Village stood in the name of one Nanjappa whose whereabouts were not known. Therefore, the accused persons had hatched a conspiracy for the purpose of creating documents in the name of the said Nanjappa and then applied for khata and usurp the said land for their benefit. When the concerned authorities insisted for the Death Certificate of Nanjappa, the kathedar of the land, accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5 entered into a conspiracy with other accused persons, particularly accused Nos.4, 7, 10 and 11, they hatched a plan for the purpose of causing the death of a person by name Krishnappa who was also of the same age as that of Nanjappa and in that context, it is alleged that on 15.09.2018, accused Nos.2 and 3 took the said person Krishnappa to the house of accused No.11-the present petitioner, and administered some tablets which causes dysentery, and due to the said effect of the purgative, he was shifted to the hospital of accused No.10. There, the said Krishnappa died and afterwards accused No.10 has issued the medical certificate in the name of Nanjappa.
Based on that, the above said accused persons had forged the death certificate of Nanjappa’s name and produced the same before the competent authorities.
4. On careful perusal of entire charge sheet papers, it discloses that the allegations made against accused Nos.1 to 3, 5 and 7 are almost similar. There are no eye witnesses to the alleged incident. The death of the deceased has to be proved during the course of full- dressed trial that it was at the instance of accused persons death of the deceased has occurred. But it is not available because the dead body of the deceased alleged to have been burnt by the accused persons. Therefore, the entire case revolves around last seen theory which requires to be established during the course of full-fledged trial. Accused Nos. 7, 10 and 11 have already been released on bail by this Court in Crl.P.Nos.9447/2018, 8509/2018 and 1713/2019 respectively on similar allegations. The entire case is based on the voluntary statement of accused No.11-Venkataswamy who implicated all other accused persons. Though, there are circumstances to show the involvement of the other accused persons still circumstances have to be proved during the course of full-dressed trial. The allegations made are similar as against other accused persons who are released on bail. Therefore, in my opinion, this petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following:
O R D E R The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.2 shall be released on bail in Cr.No.355/2018 (S.C.No.47/2019) of Avalahally police station for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 465, 471, 419, 420 of IPC, pending on the file of IX Addl. District and Sessions Judge., Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru subject to the following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iii. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
iv. The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month on every first day till the trial is concluded.
SD/- JUDGE JS/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Mr Shankarappa @ Sahukar Shankarappa vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
09 October, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra