Karnataka High Court
Sri V Hemanth Kumar vs State Of Karnataka on 30 September, 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3503/2020
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3501/2020
IN CRL.P.NO.3503/2020:
BETWEEN:
SRI. V. HEMANTH KUMAR
@ HEMANTH RAJU @ RAJU,
S/O R. VIJAY KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/OF 2ND MAIN, 14TH CROSS, GANDHINAGAR,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563101. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NANJUNDA GOWDA M.R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY GULPET POLICE STATION, KOLAR,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. GAJENDRA,
S/O MUNISWAMY,
AGED 22 YEARS,
MURAGAL VILLAGE, BANGARPET TALUK,
KOLAR-563101. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.05/2020 REGISTERED BY GULPET POLICE STATION,
KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 302,
-2-
327, 114, 504 AND 506 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(v) OF
SC/ST(POA) ACT AND ETC.,
IN CRL.P.NO.3501/2020:
BETWEEN:
SRI. CHIRANJEEVI @ CHEERU (A-1),
S/O NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
R/AT VEEBHUTHIPURA, KEELUKOTE,
KASABA HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563139. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NANJUNDA GOWDA M.R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY GULPET POLICE STATION, KOLAR,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU 560001.
2. GAJENDRA,
S/O MUNISWAMY,
MURAGAL VILLAGE,
BANGARPET TALUK,
KOLAR-563139. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.05/2020 REGISTERED BY GULPET POLICE STATION,
KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 302,
327, 114, 504 AND 506 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(v) OF
SC/ST(POA) ACT AND ETC.,
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
'THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE' THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
ORDER
Criminal Petition No.3501/2020 has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 and Criminal Petition No.3503/2020 has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C to release them on bail in Crime No.5/2020 of Gulpet Police Station, Kolar, (pending on the file of the 2nd Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kolar), for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 302, 324, 327, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. I have heard the learned counsel Sri. Nanjunda Gowda M.R for the petitioner/accused No.1 and 4 and learned HCGP Sri.Mahesh Shetty for the respondent-State. Respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented.
3. The gist of the contents of the complaint is that from 8.2.2020 to 10.2.2020, there was a festival in the village and one Naveen and his group has been called to beat the drums by paying Rs.40,000/-. On 8.2.2020, deceased Parashuram and other witnesses were beating the drums in -4- the village festival, accused No.6 and his friends accused Nos.1 and 2 told the deceased that in pursuance of their direction, they have to beat tamate and subsequently on 10.2.2020 also, the deceased and others have bet the tamate, drums and on the same day at about 5.30 pm, festival of the village was closed and there was a quarrel between Naveen and Kiran Babu and others and when they were proceeding and waiting at the bus stop to go to their place, at that time, accused Nos.1 to 6 by constituting an unlawful assembly by holding deadly weapons came there and questioned the deceased that he did not beat the drum properly and as such, there is a galata in the village and at that time, the other accused persons instigated the persons and it is accused No.4 Sri. Hemanth Raju @ Raju and accused No.5 Sri. Ravikumar caught hold of the deceased Parashuram and at that time, accused No.1 assaulted him with knife on his chest and other parts of the body with an intention to kill him, as a result of the same, there was a severe bleeding and at that time, accused Nos.2 and 3 told not to leave him and they also assaulted him with club and they have also snatched the -5- mobile phone and went away from that place. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 in Criminal Petition No.3501/2020 that complainant is not an eye witness and he has not seen the incident and he is only a complainant. It is CW.2 who is an eye witness to the alleged incident but in his statement, nothing has been stated so as to incriminate the accused Nos.1 and 4. It is his further submission that no test identification parade has been held as against accused Nos.1 and 4. No recovery has also been made from the petitioner/accused Nos.1 and 4. Seizure has been made only at the instance of accused No.2. It is his further submission that after the death of the deceased Parashuram, post mortem has been conducted and the deceased has suffered as many as seven injuries and the doctor has opined that the death is due to the complications of injuries sustained. He has not specifically stated for which reasons the death has taken place. It is his further submission that there is a delay in filing the complaint. It is his further submission that the -6- name of accused No.4 are also not found in the contents of the complaint or FIR. The only allegation which has been made is that he was holding the deceased along with accused No.5 and omnibus allegations have been made as against the accused No.4. They are ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and release him on bail.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that there are serious allegations made as against accused No.1 and 4, there are no eye witness to the incident and the medical report also supports the case of the prosecution. The injured has suffered as many as seven injuries and because of the complications, he died and the accused Nos.1 and 4 was having an intention of causing death. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. On careful perusal of the charge sheet material there are eye witnesses to the alleged incident and even serious allegations have been made as against petitioner/accused No.1 to show that it is he who has -7- assaulted on the deceased with knife on his both the sides of chest and back and as a result of the same, the blood started oozing and immediately, he has been taken to hospital but died. In so far as the petitioner/accused No.4 is concerned, the only allegation which has been made is that they caught hold of the deceased and at that time, it is petitioner/accused No.1 who assaulted with knife. Taking into consideration the specific overt acts and other conditions, I pass the following order.
7. Criminal Petition No.3501/2020 does not deserve to be considered and the same is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed.
8. There are no serious overt acts as against petitioner/accused No.4 and in that light, Criminal Petition No.3503/2020 is allowed and the petitioner/accused No.4 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.5/2020 of Gulpet Police Station, Kolar, (pending on the file of the 2nd Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kolar), for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 302, 324, 327, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled -8- Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, with following conditions:
i) The petitioner/accused No.4 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of Trial Court.
ii) The petitioner/accused No.4 shall not
tamper with the prosecution evidence
directly or indirectly.
iii) He shall be regular in attending the trial.
iv) He shall not indulge in similar type of
criminal activities.
v) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the
Court without prior permission of the
Court.
vi) He shall mark his attendance once in a
month on every first in between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. before the jurisdictional police till the trial is concluded.
If he violates any one of the conditions, respondent- Police is at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE cbc