IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.6161/2018 BETWEEN:
Shekar Shetty Aged about 48 years, S/o Thukra Shetty, Gampa House, Nandabettu, Niddodi Village and Post, Moodabidri, Mangaluru Taluk-575 010. …Petitioner (By Sri P. Karnakar, Advocate) AND:
The State by Moodabidri Police Station Mangaluru.
Rept. By the Learned Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560 001. …Respondent (By Sri M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.24/2016 of Moodabidre Police Station, Mangaluru City for the offence P/U/S 302 and 201 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner- accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C to release him on bail in Crime No.24/2016 of Moodabidre Police Station, Mangaluru City for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that petitioner- accused was working as a tailor at Nandabettu Pump House, Shuntilapadavu Noddodi Village and the deceased used to visit for delivering beedies to the beedi branch which is adjacent to the tailoring shop. She also used to give clothes to the petitioner-accused for stitching. The petitioner-accused by acting like a believable person, expressing his financial needs and requested her to lend loan during November, 2015. When she expressed her inability to lend the loan, the petitioner-accused requested her to give her gold chain by assuring that he will pledge the said ornament and borrow the loan and thereafter, he will redeem the gold ornament and assured her to return the same within a week. By believing the words of the petitioner-accused, the deceased handed over her gold chain to the petitioner-accused and petitioner-accused pledged the gold ornament on 01.12.2015 and raised loan of Rs.30,000/- and thereafter on 05.12.2015, he got redeemed and returned the same to the deceased and made her to believe that he is honest. Again in December, 2015, the accused requested loan for a week and when the deceased expressed her inability to lend the money, he insisted her to give her gold chain. The deceased by yielding to the pressure of the petitioner-accused, she handed over her gold chain to the petitioner-accused. Thereafter, the deceased insisted the petitioner-accused to return the gold chain repeatedly. The deceased called the petitioner-accused over the phone at about 03.30 PM and insisted him to return the gold ornament or else she is going to inform her family members about the incident, if he fails to return the same. At that time, the petitioner- accused called the deceased to come to Shuntilpadavu Padlagiri with an intention to take her life. When she came there, he took her to lonely place, at about 4.15 PM, going from the backside of the deceased, tied the thread made by cloth around the neck of the deceased and dragged forcefully. When she fell down, by keeping his leg on the back of the deceased and tightened the cloth thread tied around the neck of the deceased, thereby petitioner- accused committed the alleged crime. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that though the alleged incident has taken place on 29.12.2015, the complaint was registered on 23.01.2016, there is 24 days delay in filing the complaint. He further submitted that the dead body was also found decomposed and body has not been properly identified. He further submitted that the charge sheet has been filed and a complaint has been registered only on suspicious that the petitioner-accused has taken the loan by pledging the gold ornament of the deceased. There are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident. He further submitted that there are no material to connect the petitioner-accused in the alleged crime. He further submitted that the evidence which is said to be last scene theory is neither believable nor acceptable. The petitioner- accused is ready to abide by any of the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court and also ready to offer sureties, if he is released on bail. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release petitioner-accused on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that petitioner- accused took the gold ornament of the deceased and pledge the same and did not return. When the deceased insisted the petitioner-accused to return the gold ornament, then petitioner-accused with an intention to eliminate the deceased, he took her to the lonely place and committed the offence. He further submitted that the petitioner-accused has caused the death of the deceased which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. He further submitted that there are no good grounds to release the petitioner-accused on bail. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the contents of the complaint and the charge sheet materials which are available in the record go to show that there are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident. The entire case rests on circumstantial evidence and even the recovery which is said to have been made is also perpetually not acceptable.
Petitioner-accused is not required for further investigation or interrogation. The complaint has been registered only on the basis of the suspicion that the petitioner-accused took the gold chain and pledged and raised the loan. Even the dead body was fully decomposed at the time when the said body was discloses. Under the facts and circumstance, I feel that if the petitioner-accused is released on bail by imposing some stringent conditions, then it is going to meet the ends of justice.
8. In that light, the petition is allowed and petitioners-accused is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.24/2016 of Moodabidre Police Station, Mangaluru City for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC subject to following conditions:
1. The petitioner-accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
2. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
3. He shall mark his attendance on the first date of every month between 10:00 a.m to 5:00 p.m till the trial is concluded.
4. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
5. He shall be regular in attending the trial.
Sd/- JUDGE HA/-