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

Sri B V Chandrashekar vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|14 May, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION No.1150 OF 2019 Between:
Sri. B.V. Chandrashekar S/o Late Veerabhadrappa, Aged about 39 years, Fruitnut and Worshiper business, R/o Kaduru Village, Holalkere Taluk, Chitradurga District-577 526. ... Petitioner (By Sri. Haleema Ameen Advocate for Sri. Vishwajith Shetty S., Advocate) And:
State of Karnataka, Chikkajajuru Police, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri. K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.91/2018 of Chikkajajur Police Station, Chitradurga, for the offence P/U/S 304 and 201 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.91/2018 of Chikkajajuru Police Station. The present petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. Initially, a case was registered in Crime No.91/2018, under Section 363 of Indian Penal Code, on the complaint of one Chandrashekar i.e., father of the deceased by name Abhilash. The said case was registered against unknown persons. It is alleged therein that on 16.03.2018 at about 10.00 a.m., the son of the complainant namely, Abhilash aged about 4 to 5 years went to attend pre-primary class, but did not turn up till afternoon.
4. On 21.03.2018, one H.S. Prakash, uncle of the missing boy stated that through someone he came to know that a dead of a boy was lying near Kadur Stone Quarry. Based on his statement, Sections 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code were inserted. The accused/petitioner came to be arrested on 07.09.2018. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 304 and 201 of Indian Penal Code.
5. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused/petitioner, who was having some deformity in his right leg, by riding his motor cycle bearing No.KA- 17-W-9222, dashed against the deceased Abhilash and caused his death.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a case of accident and the offence committed by the petitioner is bailable in nature. However, the Police have registered a false case implicating him by registering the offences punishable under Sections 304 and 201 of Indian Penal Code. She submits that the petitioner is in custody since 08.09.2018 and the charge sheet has already been filed.
7. Learned High Court Government Pleader on the other hand vehemently contends that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution witness and thereby hamper the prosecution case. Accordingly, seeks for dismissal of the petition.
8. The charge sheet has been filed after completion of investigation. The charge sheeted offences are under Sections 304 and 201 of Indian Penal Code. Even according to the prosecution, the petitioner has deformity in his right leg. Considering the nature of the offences alleged against the petitioner and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail in Crime No.91/2018 of Chikkajajur Police Station (S.C.No.137/2018 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga) subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond in a sum of `50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Sessions Court.
ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and shall not hamper the prosecution case in any manner.
iii) The petitioner shall be regular in attending the Court proceedings.
Sd/- JUDGE BMC
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

Sri B V Chandrashekar vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
14 May, 2019
Judges
  • Mohammad Nawaz