IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2976 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SRI HEMANTH KUMAR S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS RESIDING AT ANURU VILLAGE SIDLAGHATTA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 135 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO, VIJAYAPURA POLICE STATION BENGALURU, 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 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.No.212/2018 (SPL.C.No.84/2019) OF VIJAYAPURA P.S., BENGALURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss.302, 201 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(5) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, REJECTED THE BAIL PETITION ON 16.04.2019 IN CRL.MISC.NO.1984/2018.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Notice issued to the Complainant is duly served and remained absent.
2. The petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail in Spl.C.No.84/2019 (Crime No.212/2019 of Vijayapura Police Station) for an offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State and perused the records.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was fell in love with one Shravani (deceased) during his studies. But, for various reasons, the said lady Shravani was given in marriage to one Rajesh. Thereafter, Rajesh and Shravani started living together in a rented house at Vijayapura. This petitioner was also a friend of one Meena w/o. Prabhakar, who was living in the adjacent house of Hemanth Kumar. The said Meena and Hemanth Kumar became friends and it was alleged that he was disclosing all the family matters with Meena. In that background, it is alleged that the said Shravani though married with Rajesh, she is not happy with Rajesh and she would like to leave that man and come back to the company of the petitioner and wanted to live with him. In this context, it is also stated that this Hemanth Kumar has also made a residential accommodation to her in Yeshwanthpur and she started living there for some time and this petitioner was also visiting the said house. In this background, on 19.11.2018, she consumed pesticides and also administered pesticides to the child in the house of her husband at Vijayapura. The father of the said lady Shravani initially lodged a complaint stating that she herself has committed suicide and administered pesticides to the child. The police have registered a case earlier under Section 302 of IPC because the said Shravani has administered pesticide to the child.
5. Later, the statement of Meena w/o.
Prabhakar was recorded by the police. It reveals that when the said Shravani was residing with Hemanth Kumar at Yeshwanthpur at that particular point of time, this witness Meena has advised Shravani that she should not have left the company of her husband and therefore she came back to the house of her husband. In fact, she also told the petitioner to send her back to the house of her husband. In fact the petitioner himself has told the said witness Meena to leave the said Shravani to her husband’s house. In this backdrop, the said Meena took the deceased Shravani and the child back to the house of Rajesh, husband of Shravani. At that time, the said Rajesh questioned Meena where she was working; so falsely stating that the said Shravani and Meena were working together; believing that the said Rajesh accepted her and she started living with the said person i.e., Rajesh. In this background on 19.11.2018, incident has happened. The said Meena also stated that on the date of the incident, Hemanth Kumar has told her that he has got grievance against the deceased Shravani and he will not allow her to live with her husband. Therefore, he wanted to do something to her etc. On that day itself incident has happened. On the basis of such suspicion, the police have registered a case against the petitioner for an offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.
6. On the basis of the above said circumstances, there are three instances available in the case. First of all, the petitioner and the said Shravani were residing together at Yeshwanthpur but no such incident happened. Subsequently, the father of the victim himself has stated that it is a suicidal case and the commission of the murder of the child by his own daughter. On that basis, a complaint came to be registered and subsequently on the basis of the statement of Meena, the involvement of the accused has been stated. Therefore, in my opinion, these are all the doubtful circumstances that have to be thrashed out during the course of investigation and during the course of trial. Therefore, under the above said circumstances, in my opinion, as the petitioner has already arrested and he has been in jail since 30.11.2018, with stringent conditions he may be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following order:
The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with Spl.C.No.84/2019 (Crime No.212/2019 of Vijayapura Police Station) for an offence punishable under Sections 302 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE cp*