IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.1356/2019 BETWEEN:
Surya, S/o Shanmugam, Aged about 27 years, R/at Old Bagalur Layout, Opposite Kaliyamma Temple, Kadugondahanalli, Bengaluru – 560 045. ... Petitioner (By Sri K. Ram Singh, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka by, Devarajeevanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru – 560 045.
Rep. by Government Pleader, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.171/2016 (S.C. No.34/2017) of Devarajeevanahalli Police Station, Bangalore for the offence p/u/s 302 r/w 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.171/2016 with respect to offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that one Vinodini is said to have married Surya, who is the neighbour of the complainant. The mother-in-law of Surya is stated to be residing near the house of the complainant. It is stated that Surya used to borrow money from the husband of the complainant and the complainant’s friend Vasanth and there used to be frequent quarrels regarding the said transaction between the husband of the complainant and Surya. It is stated that on 08.07.2016, when the husband of the complainant was sitting on his two wheeler outside the house and when the complainant was inside the house, she heard someone calling and when she came out, she found that accused no.1 had caught hold of the complainant and inflicted injury on his neck with the knife and accused no.2 had inflicted injury on the head and backbone. It is stated that the deceased succumbed to injuries and died. On the basis of the complaint, FIR was registered, investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed against the accused nos.1 and 2. The petitioner is stated to have been taken into custody on 10.07.2016.
3. The learned counsel for petitioner states that though the charge sheet refers to inflicting of injury by the accused no.1 on the neck of the complainant, the postmortem report states that death is due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of stab injuries caused to chest. It is further pointed out that CW’s.1 to 3 who are eyewitnesses to the commission of offence have stated in their version at the earliest point of time that they have seen the commission of offence. However, they have not supported the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile while deposing before the Court. It is further stated that as the petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2016, proof of offence being a matter for trial and as the main witnesses in support of the case of the petitioner have been examined, case is made out for enlarging the petitioner on bail.
4. The learned HCGP submits that nature of commission of offence being grave, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
5. It is to be noted that the prime witnesses viz., CWs.1, 2, and 3 who have allegedly seen the commission of offence have not supported the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile. Though it would not be appropriate in the present proceedings to record a conclusive finding or appreciate weight of evidence available, prima-facie looking into the evidence of CWs.1, 2, and 3, case is made out for enlarging the petitioner on bail. The proof of offence on the basis of other evidence to be adduced and evidence on record is a matter for trial. Taking note of the fact that petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2016, and also taking note that present proceedings are not to be treated to be punitive in nature and that there are no criminal antecedents, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions.
6. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.171/2016 with respect to offence punishable under Sections 302 r/w 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activities of like nature.
(vi) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE Np/-