Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Venkatesh @ Gunda And Others vs The State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|04 December, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8830 OF 2017 Between:
1. Venkatesh @ Gunda S/o G. Ravi, Aged about 25 years, Residing at No.32, Near Ayyappa School, Madhura Ramaswamy Palya, Bengaluru – 560 037 2. Manjunatha, S/o late Manohar, Aged about 24 years, Residing at No.52, 1st Main Road, 1st Cross, Adi Kabir Ashram Road, Mattadahalli, R.T. Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 032 (By Sri. Ramesha H.N, Advocate) ... Petitioners And:
The State of Karnataka By K.G. Halli Police Station. (By Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP) ... Respondent This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.329/2017 of Kadugondanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC.
This petition coming on for Orders, this day, the court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.8 and 12 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC, registered in respondent – police station in Crime No.329/2017.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.8 and 12 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produce in this case.
4. One Ranjit Kumar, who is the own brother of the deceased-Palani, has lodged a complaint. In the complaint, he has taken the name of only one accused- Mallesh and also stated that other 6-7 accused persons along with Mallesh had assaulted the deceased and caused bleeding injuries. When Palani was taken to the Hospital, he was declared dead by the Doctor. On the basis of the complaint, case came to be registered firstly against accused No.1 – Mallesh and others. So the name of the petitioner Nos.8 and 12 was not specifically mentioned in the complaint so also in the FIR. But during the course of investigation, they have been arraigned as accused Nos.8 and 12.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed the further statement of the complaint wherein, he has stated that except accused –Shivakumar @ Shiva and Venkatesh @ Gunda (petitioner No.8), all other persons assaulted Palani and caused his death. Therefore, it is clear that in the further statement of the compliant dated 05.07.2017, he has stated that Venkatesh @ Gunda (petitioner No.8) has not at all assaulted the deceased.
6. So far as accused No.12-Manjunath is concerned, looking to the entire prosecution material, there is no allegation as per the statement of any of the witnesses, that he has also assaulted the deceased- Palani with any deadly weapon and caused injuries. But the only allegation as per the prosecution material is that he was keeping watch of the movements of the deceased-Palani and he was informing the same to other accused persons. Except this, there is no overt act of the assault over the deceased-Palani.
7. Now investigation is complete and charge sheet is also filed. So far as the conspiracy and informing about the movement of the deceased to the other accused, it is a matter of trial. Petitioners have undertaken in the petition that they are ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by the Court. They are innocent and not involved in committing the alleged offences. Investigation is complete and charge sheet is also filed.
8. Hence, petition is allowed. Petitioners/ accused Nos.8 and 12 are ordered to be released on bail for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC, registered in respondent – police station in Crime No.329/2017, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- each and shall furnish one surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds
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

Venkatesh @ Gunda And Others vs The State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
04 December, 2017
Judges
  • Budihal R B