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

Sri Venkataswamy vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|05 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

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.1713 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Sri. Venkataswamy S/o. Venkataramappa Aged 43 years R/at Mallasandra Village Holur Hobli, Kolar Taluk & Dist., Now at present at C/o. Shivaprasad Land Near Nimbekayipura Bidarahalli, Bangalore East Taluk Bangalore District. ... PETITIONER (Sri. G.V. Narasimha Murthy, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka By Avalahalli Police Station Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court Building Bangalore. ... RESPONDENT (Sri. Honnappa, HCGP for Respondent) This Crl.P. is filed under Section 439 praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.355/2018 (S.C.No.47/2019) of Avalahally P.S., Bangalore District for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B of IPC.
This Crl.P. coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.11 in S.C.No.47/2019 (Arising out of Cr.No.355/2018) for the offences under Sections 302, 201 and 120B of IPC.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the Accused No.1 has a real estate business and he has been in the habit of creating documents in collusion with various persons in respect of the lands where the whereabouts of the owners of such lands were not known. In this backdrop, it is alleged that Sy.No.52 of Nimbekayipura village stood in the name of one Nanjappa whose whereabouts were not known. Therefore, the accused persons had hatched a conspiracy for the purpose of creating such documents in the name of the said Nanjappa and then apply for khata and usurp the said land for their benefit. When the concerned authorities insisted for the Death Certificate of Nanjappa, the kathedar of the land, Accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5 entered into a conspiracy with other accused persons, particularly Accused Nos.4, 7, 10 and 11. They hatched a plan for the purpose of causing the death of a person by name Krishnappa who was also of the same age as that of Nanjappa and in that context, it is alleged that on 15.09.2018 Accused Nos.2 and 3 took the said person Krishnappa to the house of Accused No.11 – the present petitioner, and administered some tablets which causes dysentery, as a result of which he suffered due to the said effect of the purgative and thereafter he was shifted to the hospital of Accused No.10. There, the said Krishnappa died and afterwards Accused No.10 has issued the Medical Certificate in the name of Nanjappa. Based on that, the above said accused persons had forged the Death Certificate in Nanjappa’s name and produced the same before the competent authorities.
4. The allegation made against Accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 are almost similar. There are no eye- witnesses to the incident. Only last seen theory requires to be established during the course of a full- fledged trial. The co-accused No.7 has already been released on bail by this Court in Crl.P.9447/2018 and Accused No.10 has also been released on anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.P.8509/2018. As narrated in the above said paragraph, similar allegations are made against the present petitioner – Accused No.11. Therefore, on the ground of parity, in my opinion, the petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on similar conditions. Hence, the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner / Accused No.11 shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.355/2018 (S.C.No.47/2019) of Avalahalli Police Station, subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner / Accused No.11 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial court.
ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
iv) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month on every first day till the trial is concluded.
Sd/- JUDGE KS
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 Venkataswamy vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
05 August, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra