IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7273 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
1. T.Manohar @ Manu S/o Late Thimmarayappa Aged about 31 years R/at No.429, Muneshwara Temple Road 6th Cross, S.N.Halli, Ananthpur, Yelahanka, Bengaluru-560 064.
2. Sri.T.Harish S/o Late Thimmarayappa Aged about 25 years R/at No.429, Muneshwara Temple Road 6th Cross, S.N.Halli Ananthpur, Yelahanka Bengaluru-560 064 ...Petitioners (By Sri.T.C.Prabhakara, Advocate-absent) AND:
The State of Karnataka by Kothanur Police Station Represented by State Public Prosecutor 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 the Criminal Procedure Code praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in CR.No.254/2017 of Kothanur Police Station, Bangalore City for the Offences P/U/S/ 302, 201 R/w 34 of IPC and etc.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 439 of Cr.PC to release them on bail in Crime No.254/2017 of Kothanur P.S., Bengaluru City for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 R/w 34 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, inspite of giving sufficient opportunity and the case is posted on day to day basis, did not turned.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that there were civil disputes between the accused and the deceased regarding the property situated by the side of Ashok Apartment. The accused persons were insisting that the said property belongs to their grand father and used to come and ask with the husband of C.W.-1/complainant that they have got share in the property and used to create nuisance and also used to ask for financial help. It is further alleged that because of said enmity, on 19.12.2017, at about 6.50 p.m., when the deceased was coming on his two wheeler, at that time, accused came in an auto ricksha bearing No.KA- 04 AA 6933 and asked the deceased to pay money and property. When the deceased refused, the accused persons assaulted the deceased with knife on the stomach, back and other parts of the body and caused bleeding injuries. As a result, his intestine came out and because of heavy bleeding, the complainant and some other persons took the deceased to Avitha Hospital, Kottanuru, there the hospital authorities asked them to shift to other hospital for higher treatment as he was serious, then, he was shifted to Peoples Tree Hospital and there, the deceased succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is contended in the petition that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged. It is also stated that there are contradictory and inconsistent statements with regard to the witnesses who have been examined by the police. One Vinay M., who is the younger brother of the complainant, is not an eye witness to the alleged incident and he was not there at the time of alleged incident and even the watchman of the apartment was also not an eye witness and further stated that they are abide by any of the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court and also ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, they prays to allow the petition and to release them on bail.
5. Per contra learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that C.W.2 to 4 are the eye witnesses to the alleged incident and in their statements, they have categorically deposed that the accused persons by obstructing the deceased vehicle, have assaulted with knife and caused 33 injuries and even the intestine came out. The eye witnesses also categorically stated about the overtacts of the accused persons. Further submitted that there is prima-facie material to show that because of previous enmity, the accused persons had committed the murder of the deceased. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the material which has been made available and perused the records.
7. On perusal of the records, it clearly goes to show that CW 2 and 4 are the eye witnesses to the alleged incident and have categorically stated that it is accused Nos.1 and 2 along with a minor who is legally challenged person have assaulted the deceased with knife and cause grievous injury. As a result of the same, his intestine came out. Thereafter, they have shifted him to Peoples Tree Hospital and also informed the CW1/complainant. On perusal of the documents, they clearly shows that there is prima facie material as against the accused petitioners. The accused petitioners have not made out any good grounds to entertain the petition and to release them on bail. Hence, the petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE PN/-