IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4803/2019 BETWEEN:
SRI.SHIVAKUMAR S.C., S/O CHIKKAPEMMAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT SEETHAHALLI VILLAGE, BASHETTIAHALLI HOBLI, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT – 562 105.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI.B.N. UMESH, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY DIBBURAHALLI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI.K.P.YOGANNA, HCGP;
NOTICE TO COMPLAINANT – SERVED - ABSENT) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.11/2019 OF DIBBURAHALLI POLICE STATION, CHIKKABALLAPURA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 504, 302 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND SEC.3(1)(r)(s) AND 3(2)(v-a) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The notice ordered to be issued to the complainant is said to have been served through the police as per the statement made by the learned Government Pleader. Inspite of the same, the complainant has remained absent.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the entire charge sheet papers.
3. The brief allegations made against the petitioner are that the petitioner and other accused persons as well as complainant Akkaiahmma are all residents of Seetahally village and the complainant belonged to Scheduled Caste. It is also alleged that there is some land dispute between the two families since six years. It is further alleged that on 8.2.2019 at about 8.00 a.m. in the morning, this petitioner along with other accused persons formed an unlawful assembly, came near the house of the complainant and started abusing and damaging the flower plants by putting mud on it. At that time, the complainant and her daughter-in-law - Narayanamma came out of their house and questioned the act of the accused persons. At that time all the accused persons assaulted the complainant and deceased Narayanamma. It is particularly alleged that the petitioner-Shivakumar who was holding spade in his hand assaulted on the head of the deceased which caused severe injury to the head of the deceased and she died instantaneously at the spot. On hearing the screaming of the complainant, villagers who gathered there shifted the deceased to the hospital in an ambulance.
4. On careful perusal of the entire materials on record, the complainant herself is an eye witness. She has categorically stated as to how the incident happened and there is recovery at the instance of accused No.1 in this context. When an eye witness version is available, the other submissions of the learned counsel that the offences may fall under Section 304 of IPC and there was no motive or intention to kill the deceased Narayanamma are all required to be considered by the Court on the basis of the evidence that has to be recorded by the Court. In that view of the matter, I do not find any strong reasons to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Hence, the petition is dismissed.
However, the observations made by this Court in the course of this order are only for the purpose of disposing of this petition and it shall not in any manner persuade the trial Court at the time of deciding the case on merits.
Sd/- JUDGE *alb/-.