IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3101 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Syed Hussain Sharief @ Syed Siddique S/o Syed Shamshuddin @ Syed Altaf, Aged about 20 years R/at Rent House of Byregowda Behind Idga Nelamangala – 562 123 (By Sri. K. Ramsingh, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka by Nelamangala Rural Police Station Bengaluru District – 562 123 Represented by Government Pleader High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru – 560 001 2. N.K. Nagaraj S/o Late Kenchaiah Aged about 47 years R/at #194, Rayan Nagar Nelamangala – 562 123 (By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP for R1;
...Petitioner ...Respondents Sri. K. Hemantha Kumar for M.T. Nanaiah Associates, Advocate for R2) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.21/2018 (Spl.C.No.250/2018) of Nelamangala Rural Police Station, Bengaluru District for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(C) (2) (5) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The present petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C to release the petitioner on bail in Crime No.21/2018 (Special C.C. No.250/2018) of Nelamangala Rural Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and also Section 3 CI(2) (5) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that a missing complaint was lodged by the brother of the deceased on 24.01.2018. Subsequently, on 01.02.2018, accused Nos.2 and 3 were apprehended and during the course of investigation, they revealed that on 23.01.2018 since the deceased was demanding money from them for having used the shed as tenants, accused persons, who were juvenile offenders took the deceased inside the shed and assaulted him with iron bar and inflicted injury with knife on the neck and head and separated the head and body of deceased and buried the head in the floor of the shed. Later, they had put the remaining body of deceased in a plastic bag and thereafter, the body of the deceased was transported in the car bearing Registration No.KA-03-ME- 8876 and was thrown into Vrushabavathi Water Channel and the charge sheet has been filed.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that there are no eye witnesses to the alleged incident and accused is aged about 20 years.
Since 22 months, no progress has been made in this case and even the charge has also not been framed. The accused is unnecessarily languishing in the jail. It is further submitted that earlier this Court has rejected the bail application. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is seeking to grant bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader, vehemently argued and submitted that the accused has approached this Court in Crl.P.No.7212/2018. This Court by order dated 27.02.2019 dismissed the petition by taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and the manner in which the murder of the deceased has taken place. No new grounds have been made out to reconsider the bail petition and therefore, the petition be dismissed.
6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.7212/2018.
7. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that accused is aged about 20 years and since 22 months, he is languishing in jail. That is the only ground pleaded by the learned counsel for the accused to consider the bail application.
8. Under the said facts and circumstances of the case, no new grounds have been made out to reconsider the bail application.
9. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial expeditiously within an outer limit of one year. In the event, trial Court does not conclude the trial within the aforesaid period, then under such circumstances, the petitioner-accused is given liberty to file appropriate application for grant of the bail.
Mds/-
Sd/- JUDGE