IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.428/2019 BETWEEN:
Yashawanth @ Safari S/o Keshavashetty, Aged about 17 years, Since minor;
Rept. By his father Sri Keshavashetty, Aged about 52 years, R/at Ganigara Street, Nagamangala Town & Taluk, Mandya District-560 043. …Petitioner (By Sri Ravikumar G.H, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka By Nagamangala Rural Police Station, By Special Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560 001. …Respondent (By Sri M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.32/2018 (S.C.No.73/2018) of Nagamangala Rural Police Station, Mandya District for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 302, 201 R/W 149 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 juvenile petitioner-accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking his release on bail in Crime No.32/2018 of Nagamangala Rural Police Station, Mandya District (S.C.No.73/2018) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 302, 201 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the complainant was working as a Waterman for the past 3 (three) years in Palagrahara Gramapanchayath and from the past few months, he has been entrusted with supply of water to Byadarah alli, Hosahalli and Chikkegowdana Koppalu villages. He was near the pump house located on the left side of the Byadarahalli village in order to carry on the work entrusted to him. On 06.03.2018 at about 3.30 p.m., when the complainant was near his land, the Vice Chairman of Byadarahalli Gramapanchayath informed him over mobile phone stating that a unknown dead body has been buried in the trench and the legs and hands of the dead body had been covered by stones and mud. Immediately, he went near the pump set and noticed that a male dead body was buried by covering stones and mud and he suspected that this incident might have taken place about 3-4 days back. He informed the police and on the basis of the complaint, a case was registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and the entire case rests on the circumstantial evidence. He further submitted that there is no incriminating material against petitioner-accused No.3 to show that his involvement in the alleged crime. He further submitted that accused No.5 has already been released on bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.5988/2018 dated 23.10.2018. On the ground of parity, the petitioner- accused No.3 is also entitled to be released on bail. He further draws the attention of this Court to the Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘the Act’ for short), submitted that the petitioner-accused No.3 is a juvenile offender and he should be released on bail. He is ready to abide by any of the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to offer surety, if he is released on bail. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner-accused No.3 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that petitioner- accused No.3 is involved in a serious offence and the alleged offence is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. He further submitted that petitioner-accused No.3 along with remaining accused persons have assaulted the deceased, murdered him and in order to close the evidence of the alleged murder, have put the body in trench and concealed the said act. If the petitioner-accused No.3 is released on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and he may abscond and he may not be available for the trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner-accused No.3 is juvenile offender. Section 12 of the Act which reads as under;
12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.-
1. When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person:
Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision.
2. When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under subsection (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board.
3. When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.
4. When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfill the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail.
8. On going through the said section, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed but no such ground has been made out. This Court by considering the Section 12 of the Act in the case of KARAN S/O OF MOHAN CHINNARARHOD VS. THE STATE IN CRL.RP. NO.200018/2017 DATED 22.02.2017, RATKAL POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI DISTRICT reported in ILR 2017 KARNTAKA has come to the conclusion that the Court cannot refuse the bail until the said circumstances and conditions are existing. The prosecution has not produced any material to substantiate the said aspect.
9. Keeping in view the law laid down in the case referred above and already the accused Nos.4 and 5 have been released on bail, and on the ground of parity, petitioner-accused No.3 is also entitled to be released on bail in Crime No.32/2018 of Nagamangala Rural Police Station, Mandya District (S.C.No.73/2018) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 302, 201 read with Section 149 of IPC subject to following conditions:
1. Petitioner-accused No.3 shall execute a personal bond along with guardian for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court.
2. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner till the completion of the trial.
3. He shall not indulged in similar type of criminal activities in future.
4. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court or Board without it’s prior permission.
5. He shall be regular in attending the Court for the trial as and when required.
Sd/- JUDGE HA/-