Karnataka High Court
Puttappa @ Puttangouda S/O. ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 June, 2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 13 T H DAY OF JUNE 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S.PACHHAPURE
CRIMINAL PETI TION No.10748/2013
BETWEEN
1. PUTTAPPA @ PUTTANGOUDA S/O. BASAVANNEPPA
IDIGOUDRA
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
2. HONNAPPA @ HONNANAGOUDA
S/O. BASAVANNEPPA IDIGOUDRA
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
3. BASAVANNEPPA @ BASANAGOUDA
S/O. CHANNABASAPPA IDIGOUDRA
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
4. CHADRAPPA S/O. SHIVAPPA IDIGOUDRA
AGE: MAJOR. OCC: AGRICULTURE
5. NEELAVVA W/O. BASAVANNEPPA @ BASANAGOUDA
IDIGOUDRA
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
6. MALLIKARJUNGOUDA S/O. BHEEMANAGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
ALL ARE R/O. MEVUDI, TQ & DIST: HAVERI
..... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI K.M. SHIRALLI, ADV.)
2
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
GUTTAL P.S. REPRESENTED BY
R/BY SPP CIRCUIT BENCH
DHARWAD
..... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.S. PATIL, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF
CR.P.C. SEEKING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL
IN C.C.NO.147/2013, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.
CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) & CJM COURT, HAVERI,
REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 143, 147, 148,
323, 324, 307, 302, 451, 504, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC,
ARISING OUT OF GUTTAL P.S. CRIME NO.152/2012.
THIS CRIMINAL PETI TION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners have approached this Court for grant of bail having been arrested and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 302, 307, 451, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC.
3
2. The facts reveal that on 04.12.2012, that the complainant and his family members were cutting sugarcane. The petitioners and other accused came to the land and threatened danger to their life in case the sugarcane is cut. In this context, the police had advised both the parties not to cut the sugarcane until the matter is decided. On 05.12.2012, at 7.30 a.m. when the complainant and their family members were in the house, the petitioners and other accused formed unlawful assembly and with a common object to assault the family members of the complainant and said to have entered into the house and dragged Honnappa and other family members outside and said to have assaulted the deceased and other persons with the weapons like iron rod and Kud & Tala (agricultural implements) and said to have caused death of Honnappa, the brother of the complainant and injuries to Honakerappa and Tirakappa. A complaint was lodged by the complainant i.e. 4 Maruti, the son of Tirakappa. The police held the investigation and charge sheet is filed against the petitioners and other accused for the aforesaid offences.
3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have not assaulted the deceased and as others sustained injuries and as all the members of the family have been taken into custody, he submits that the petitioners were the member of an unlawful assembly, in the circumstances, he requests for grant of bail. It is also his submission that 3 r d petitioner is aged person and 5th petitioner is woman and they did not intend to cause the death of the deceased. He claims bail by imposing stringent conditions.
4. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader orally objects the grant of bail to the petitioners.
5
5. Perusal of the material placed on record reveals that the petitioners and other accused committed an act of trespass in the house of the complainant and dragging the members of the family and caused assault on the deceased and two others. The petitioners No.1 & 2 are said to have assaulted Honakerappa and petitioner No.3 is said to have assaulted Tirakappa, the father of the complainant. So far as the rest of the petitioners are concerned, it is said that they threw chilly powder and bet the injured. So far as the petitioners No.1 & 2 are concerned, there is specific allegation in the complaint, that they assaulted the injured persons and therefore, considering the fact that there is common object to assault the deceased Honnappa and there is material against the petitioners No.1 & 2 as well for the said offences by invoking the Section 149 of IPC. So far as petitioner No.3 is concerned, he is aged about 65 years and said to be the elder member of the family. 6 As against petitioners No. 4 to 6, the only allegation is that they bet the injured and petitioner No.5 the wife of Basavanneppa is said to have thrown chilly powder and as she is a woman and as against the petitioners No.3, 4 & 6 there is only allegation that they bet the injured and so far as the petitioner No.3 is concerned, is an aged person, I think they are entitled for bail sought for.
6. In the result, the petition is allowed in part. The request of the petitioners No.1 & 2 (accused No.3 & 4) is rejected. The petitioners No.3 to 6 (accused No.5, 7, 8, 9) are ordered to be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the further following conditions:
1) They shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to 7 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer.
2) They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court below without the prior permission.
3) They shall attend the Court as and when directed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Naa