IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8638 OF 2016 BETWEEN :
SRI. MADLANDA NANAIAH @ SUBRAMANI, S/O. LATE DEVAIAH, AGED 32 YEARS, R/AT MEGHATHALU VILLAGE POST, MADIKERI TALUK 571201, KODAGU DISTRICT. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHARAN KUMAR K.V., ADV. FOR SRI. RANJITH K.S., ADV.) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY MADIKERI RURAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP ) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.151/2016 OF MADIKERI RURAL P.S., KODAGU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 307 OF IPC AND SECTION 3, 25 OF INDIAN ARMS ACT AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner who was the sole accused in Crime No. 151/2016 now pending in S.C. No. 63/2016 has been charged for the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 307 of IPC and under Section 3 read with Section 25 of Indian Arms Act is seeking for being enlarged on bail.
2. Heard Sri Charan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri K.Nageshwarappa, learned HCGP, appearing for State. Perused the records.
3. A complaint came to be filed by the wife of the petitioner alleging that she got married to the petitioner in the year 2009 and out of said wedlock a female child was born and on account of certain disputes having arisen between them, she has been residing separately. She also alleged in her complaint that in the year 2013 petitioner had assaulted her in respect of which she had lodged a complaint and in that regard proceedings are pending before Court. She further alleged that when said matter was posted for recording evidence and at that point of time on 20.5.2016 she appeared before Court to tender her evidence and at that point of time accused approached her to compromise by filing a petition for divorce and asked her to take back her belongings and as such she states that she went to the house of the petitioner along with her father and at that point of time, petitioner fired from his rifle to her father resulting in injury being caused to his right arm and left thumb finger. Hence, she requested for suitable action being taken against the accused. Petitioner came to be apprehended and is in judicial custody till date.
Jurisdictional police having investigated the complaint have filed charge sheet against petitioner which proceedings are now pending in S.C. No. 63/2016 before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri.
4. It is the contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that trial has virtually come to an end before the trial Court and all the witnesses have been examined and except CW2, the father of the complainant, all other witnesses who have been examined have turned hostile and as such he prays for the petitioner being enlarged on bail by taking into consideration that petitioner is in custody from 21.5.2016.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP opposing the prayer contends that official witnesses are yet to be examined and CW2, namely the injured, i.e., the father of the complainant and the father-in-law of the petitioner, has supported the case of the prosecution and in the event of the petitioner being enlarged on bail, he is likely to repeat his act. There is every chances of petitioner absconding from the jurisdictional Court. Hence, he prays for rejection of the petition.
6. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for parties and on perusal of records, it would disclose that relationship between the complainant and the accused is husband and wife and there has been a matrimonial dispute knot between the two. Undisputedly, complainant is residing separately and in the pending Sessions case, witnesses relied upon by the prosecution examined till date, except the father of the complainant (injured) including the complainant have turned hostile. Hence, taking into consideration that the petitioner has already spent a period of 15 months in judicial custody and the fact that prosecution witnesses other than the official witnesses (police officers) have already been examined and also cross- examined, the prayer sought for the petitioner requires to be granted conditionally. However, in order to allay the apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP, it would be necessary to impose stringent conditions on the petitioner.
7. Hence, the following :
ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one independent solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court and subject to the following conditions :-
(a) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court of Madikeri without express permission.
(b) Petitioner shall mark his attendance before the Madikeri Rural Police Station everyday till the conclusion of the trial and every alternate day till the conclusion of the proceedings.
(c) Petitioner shall not indulge in either inducing or terrorizing or threatening any of the prosecution witnesses.
(d) Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the hearing dates without fail.
In the event of any of the above conditions being violated, prosecution would be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail.
SD/- JUDGE ckl