IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5436 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Vignesh @ Appu, S/o Late Shankar, Aged about 24 years, Residing at No.231, 5th Cross, Flower Garden, Cottonpet, Bengaluru-560 053.
(By Sri. Ganesh G.G, Advocate) AND:
State by Cottonpet Police, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court complex, Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP) ...Petitioner ...Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.1/2018 (S.C.No.1145/2018) of Cottonpet police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail in Crime No.1/2018 registered by Cottonpet Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. Brief facts of the case as per the complaint are that on 31.12.2017 at about 11.00 p.m., near Reddy Building, accused Nos. 1 to 3 along with another juvenile offender in furtherance of common intention picked up quarrel with deceased Vinith and among the accused persons, accused No.1 – Vignesh @ Appu stabbed the deceased Vinith with a dragger on his neck.
Deceased Vinith suffered injuries and immediately thereafter, he was shifted to hospital and there he succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of the said complaint, a case came to be lodged.
4. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that though the present petitioner preferred a petition earlier before this Court, the same came to be dismissed. Now the material witnesses PWs-1 to 4 have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and there is no material evidence as against the accused. It is his further submission that the spot mahazar panch to Ex-P5 has been examined as PW2. In his evidence, there is no consistency and even he has not identified the said knife, which has been recovered at the instance of the accused. It is his further submission that the accused-petitioner is languishing in jail since from the date of his arrest. He further submitted that other witnesses are not the material witnesses and the trial may take some more time. He further submitted that petitioner-accused is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays to allow the petition and release the petitioner-accused No.1 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that PW-4 is the eye witness to the alleged incident and he has specifically stated that the accused-petitioner has assaulted the deceased with knife on the neck. Already petitioner has approached this Court and this Court by considering the material placed on record, has rightly dismissed the petition. There are no good grounds to reconsider the bail application. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records and evidence of PWs-1 to 4. On close reading of the evidence of PW1, who is the complainant but she is not an eye witness to the incident. PW2 is the witness to Ex-P5 whereunder knife is said to have been recovered. PWs.3 and 4 are the material witnesses. On close reading of the evidence, PW3 in his evidence has clearly stated that two persons, who were present in VC have murdered the deceased Vinith and he has also identified the accused persons during the course of examination in chief. Nothing has been elicited during the course of cross-examination to discard his evidence, so also PW4 has also specifically stated that the accused-petitioner has assaulted the deceased with knife on the neck. He has also identified the accused. Under such facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that there are material as against the accused for having involved in the serious offence, which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has not made out any good grounds to release him on bail. Hence, the Petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE ag