IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 804/2019 BETWEEN:
1. Sri.Anil, S/o Irisan, Aged 29 years, R/at No.09. 42nd Cross, 4th Block, 18th C Main, Jayanagar, Bengaluru City – 560041.
2. Sri.Anand, S/o Ramachandrappa, Aged 30 years, R/at No.801, 28th Main, 27th cross, CP Colony, Corporation, Jayanagar, Bengaluru City – 560069.
3. Sri.Krishna, S/o Late Kaliperumal, Aged about 28 years, R/at 28th main, 39th Cross, Indiragandhi Colony, Sarakki, J.P.Nagar, Bengaluru City – 560078. ...Petitioners (By Sri.S.Balakrishna, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By Talagattapura Police Station, Bengaluru Rural District, Represented by Special Public Prosecutor, High court Building, Bengaluru – 560001. ... Respondent (By Smt.Namitha Mahesh.B.G, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.306/2018 of Thalaghattapura Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 302, 201, 120B and 149 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 petitioners/accused Nos.2, 5 and 7 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking to release them on bail in Crime No.306/2018 (S.C.No.356/2018) of Thalaghattapura Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 302, 201, 120B and 149 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that one Sri.Balaji, husband of Smt.Vani and deceased Sri.L.Prasad Babu @ Babu, husband of Anitha were friends. They were doing real estate business. Deceased L.Prasad Babu had given a cash of Rs.51 lakhs to accused No.1 for the said real estate business as the said project did not go through, both the deceased requested accused No.1 to return the money. On 26.06.2018 at about 6.30 p.m., deceased Sri.L.Prasad Babu telephoned to accused No.1 and informed that on the following day both the deceased would come to meet him and at that time he should return the entire amount. Accused No.1 decided that if amount is repaid to both the deceased then he is going to be liquidated and he planned to eliminate them. It is further alleged that, in pursuance of the said idea he called accused Nos.2 to 5, 7 and 8 and thereafter they called the deceased to vacant plot and there they all talked with them. Thereafter accused No.1 asked both the deceased to come to his godown situated in Anjanapura and he requested accused Nos.2 to 5, 7 and 8 to wait near the godown and when both the deceased came near the godown thereafter, they asked them that whether they have finished their meals and took inside the godown and locked the same. Thereafter, they tied their hands and legs to a plastic chair and then they packed up with packing tape rolls on their faces, as a result of the same, both were prevented from breathing and after some time they breath their last. It is further case of the prosecution that thereafter with the help of accused No.10, accused persons took the body in a Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-44 N-0099 and as per the instructions of the accused No.1 that the said bodies were burnt by using fuel-wood. On the basis of the missing complaint during the course of investigation, the above facts have been discussed. After investigation charge sheet has also been filed.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that already accused Nos.6, 9 and 10 have been granted bail and accused No.7 also stands on the same footing and he is also entitled to be released on bail. He further submits that the entire case rests on the circumstantial evidence and there are no eye witnesses to the alleged incident. Only on the basis of the voluntary statement of accused No.1 remaining accused persons have been inculcated in this case. He further submits that the only motive was in between the deceased and accused No.1 in so far as other accused persons are concerned that there is no motive to the alleged crime. He further submits that both the deceased were insisting for returning of money to accused No.1 and as stated, it is the accused No.1 who hatched the plan and eliminated both the deceased. He further submits that the statement of CW.25 and CW.26 only discloses the fact that they have purchased fuel wood and no other overt acts have been stated by any of the witnesses. In so far as accused No.7 is concerned he has taken vehicle and carried the bodies in order to conceal the evidence. He further submits that the accused/petitioners have not involved in the alleged crime. The accused/petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed on them by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the accused/petitioners on bail.
5. Per Contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that there is a strong motive that both the deceased forced the accused to return the amount of Rs.51 lakhs, which they had paid and the same has not been returned. In order to avoid returning of the said amount, along with other persons accused No.1 eliminated both the deceased. She further submits that CCTV footages clearly shows that accused No.2 had come in the vehicle of the deceased and that he was present at the time when alleged incident has taken place. She further submits that the accused persons have also shown the place where they had burnt the mobile phones of the deceased and the same has been recovered. She submits that the statement of CW.25 and CW.26 clearly states that accused Nos.5 and 7 had purchased timber for the purpose of burning the bodies. She also submits that the recovery of the vehicle is also at the instance of the accused/petitioners. There are circumstances to the incident, that the accused/petitioners are conneted to the alleged crime. On these grounds, she prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the records.
7. Admittedly that there are no eye witnesses to the alleged incident. This case rests on circumstantial evidence. Even as could be seen from the records there are no circumstances to connect the accused/petitioners to the alleged crime. The only allegation which has been made against the petitioners is that at the instance of the accused No.1 that they have come to the godown and took deceased inside the godown and by using the plastic packing rolls they pasted the same on the face of the deceased. Thereby they smothered, as a result of the same, both deceased died. In order to substantiate the said facts no other material is there except the voluntary statement of the accused No.1. Under the said facts and circumstances and that to already accused Nos.6, 9 and 10 have been released on bail. In that light, already charge sheet has been filed. I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions, if the accused/petitioners are ordered to be released on bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
8. In the light of discussions held by me above, petition is allowed. Petitioners/accused are enlarged on bail in Crime No.306/2018 (S.C.No.356/2018) of Thalaghattapura Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 302, 201, 120B and 149 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioners/accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs only) with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission.
3. They shall mark their attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the concerned police station, till the trial is concluded.
4. They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
5. They shall regularly appear before the trial Court for trial, without fail.
Sd/- JUDGE NS