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

Venkataramu V vs State Of Karnataka By Kengeri

High Court Of Karnataka|22 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No. 1370/2019 BETWEEN:
Venkataramu V., S/o. Late Venkateshappa, Aged about 52 years, R/at Opp. to RES College, Hegganahalli Cross, Sunkadakatte, Bengaluru 560 091. ... Petitioner (By Sri. Venkatraman K., Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka By Kengeri P.S., Rep. by SPP High Court Complex, Bangalore 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.298/2018 of Kengeri P.S., on the file of the Hon’ble LVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge (CCH-57) at Bangalore for the offence punishable under Section 302 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.298/2018 with respect to the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complaint was filed on 10.08.2018 by one Rangaswamy, S/o Rangaiah, stating that some unknown persons had committed murder of the deceased Gowramma who is his stepmother. After the complaint was lodged, FIR registered, investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed.
4. The learned counsel for petitioner states that there is none who has witnessed the commission of the offence and the case rests on circumstantial evidence. It is further submitted that proof of offence is a matter for trial.
5. Taking note of the fact that case rests on circumstantial evidence and there is no eyewitness who has seen the commission of the offence, the question as to recovery and its proof is a matter for trial, that investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions.
6. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Crime No.298/2018 with respect to the offence punishable under Section 302 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) 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.
Np/-
Sd/- JUDGE
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

Venkataramu V vs State Of Karnataka By Kengeri

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
22 July, 2019
Judges
  • S Sunil Dutt Yadav