Karnataka High Court
Suresh S/O. Parasappa Beladhadi vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 November, 2017
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K. Somashekar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102383/2017
BETWEEN
Suresh S/o: Parasappa Beladhadi,
Age: 27 Years, Occ: Business,
R/o: Gangapur Peth, Gadag,
Tq & Dist: Gadag.
.......Petitioner
(By Sri K.M.Shiralli, Advocate )
AND:
The State of Karnataka
By Gadag Town P.S.,
Represented by SPP,
High Court of Karnataka,
Bench Dharwad.
........Respondent
(By Sri Praveen.K Uppar, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C., seeking to release this petitioner on bail in Spl.
SC/ST No.12/2017 arising out of Gadag Town P.S., Crime
No.192/2017 registered against them, for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 341, 307, 504, 506 r/w 34 of
IPC and offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(R)(S), 3(2)(V),
3(2) (VA) SC/ST and Prevention of Atrocities Amendment Act,
2015, pending on the file of Prl. District and Sessions Judge,
Gadag..
2
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the court
made the following:
ORDER
This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.192/2017 of Gadag Town Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under Section 323, 341, 307, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, besides Sections 3(1)(R)(S), 3(2)(V), 3(2) (VA) SC/ST and Prevention of Atrocities Amendment Act, 2015. Since from the date of arrest the accused is in judicial custody. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner praying for enlargement of the petitioner on regular bail among the grounds urged therein.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent - State.
3. As could be seen in the complaint, it reveals that on 25.06.2017 the complaint came to be registered before the PSI of Gadag Town Police Station, wherein he has alleged that there was the Kabadi Sports competition held on behalf of temple of Gangapur Peth at Ambedkar Nagar, Gadag. As on e 3 of the player in the team of Vakaligara oni. Since opposite kabadi team which was about to playing with his team had not come, for that reason that there was an altercation between the accused as well as the complainant. Wherein accused No.2 alleged to be abused the complainant in filthy language, accused No.3 who was also participated with other accused for committing the alleged offences. However, the complainant who was escaped from the clutches of the accused at the scene of crime, but all the accused were abused the complainant in filthy language by holding his caste, which wounded his feelings. In pursuance of the Act of the accused on filing of the complaint filed by the complainant, the case in Crime No.192/2017 came to be registered and thereafter proceed with the case for investigation, wherein the Investigating Officer has laid the charge sheet before the Principal District and Sessions and Special Court Gadag, in Spl. SC/ST C.C.No.12/2017. Since from the date of arrest, the accused is in judicial custody for the alleged crime. However, the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court. But those accused and this 4 accused are in the similar footings for the alleged offences but the entire materials which find place in the record, it does not constitutes the alleged offences. The accused is the only bread winner of the family and all family members are depending upon the sources to eke out their livelihood. If the accused kept behind the bar for a longer period, the family will be ruined in the society. It is further contended that the petitioner/accused is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail to him. Therefore, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail, as they are in the similar footing for the alleged offences.
4. Per contra, the learned HCGP for the respondent- State during the course of arguments contended by reiterating the averments made in the complaint and also reflected made in the FIR which is registered in Crime No.192/2017 on 25.06.2017, wherein the complaint came to be registered alleging that this accused was picked up quarrel with the complainant and also made an attempt to take away the life by abusing in filthy language by holding his caste which wounded his feelings by urging various grounds. The 5 learned HCGP during the course of his arguments contended that the accused who is having other cases and also to be required for facing of trial. Therefore, the accused does not deserve for bail. If the accused is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of the prosecution case and destroy the evidence and praying to reject the bail petition.
5. Having regard to the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned HCGP for the respondent-State as stated supra, as the averments made in the complaint and so also materials which were reflected in the FIR as well as in the charge sheet has been laid before the Special Court Gadag in Spl.SC/ST C.C.No.12/2017 for the alleged offences, reflected in Gadag Town Police in Crime No.192/2017. But the Investigating Officer who has collected the entire materials by laying charge sheet against the accused to proceed against him for framing of charge and also required for facing of trial. But at a cursory glance all the materials which were collected by the Investigating Officer, wherein he has laid the charge sheet 6 against the accused which is pending before the Spl. Court are concerned. But it cannot be said that there are enough materials to decline the relief of bail, merely because for allegation made against the petitioner. However, the co- accused has already been granted bail by this Court, as the accused is in the similar footings. Therefore, at this stage it is said that it does not require any detail discussion while considering the bail petition filed by the petitioner, as there are substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking for the relief of bail.
6. Whereas, the learned HCGP submits that if the accused is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and destroy the evidence. This apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons and as well as the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is deserving for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: 7
ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed subject to the following conditions:
(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with likesum surety to the satisfaction of the Prl. District and Sessions & Special Court, Gadag, where the case in Spl. SC/ST C.C.No.12/2017 arise out of Crime No.192/2017 by Gadag Town Police, is pending.
(2) The petitioner shall appear before the Court on all the dates of hearing without fail.
(3) The petitioner shall not tamper or hamper the case of prosecution witnesses.
(4) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the concerned SHO once in fortnight as per the English monthly calendar i.e. on first week of Sunday in between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. pending disposal of the entire case.8
(5) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Gadag District, without prior permission from the concerned Court of law.
(6) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activities henceforth.
If the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.
Sd/-
JUDGE msr