Sunil Kumara H M @ Randy vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 March, 2015

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sunil Kumara H M @ Randy vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 March, 2015

Bench: A.V.Chandrashekara

                          1


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 10TH    DAY OF MARCH 2015

                       BEFORE

   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA

        CRIMINAL PETITION NO.373/2015
BETWEEN:
SUNIL KUMARA H M @ RANDY
S/O LATE MANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
R/AT GANDHINAGAR,
HIRISAVE
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-34
                                       ... PETITIONER

(By Sri: MOHANKUMARA D, ADV.)


AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY HIRISAVE POLICE STATION
HASSAN DISTRICT
REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE-01
                                 ... RESPONDENT

(By Sri: B.J. ESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
                                  2


     CRL.P FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.51/2013 OF
HIRISAVE POLICE STATION, HASSAN DISTRICT, FOR
THE OFFENCES P/U/S 302 & 201 OF IPC, PENDING ON
THE FILE OF THE FTC, CHANNAPATNA, IN
S.C.NO.189/2013 AND ETC.


     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                            ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP.

2. Petitioner is 2nd accused in a criminal case in Crime No.21/13 on the file of Hirisave police station, Channarayapatna Taluk. He is in judicial custody since 16.4.2013.

3. Learned HCGP has opposed grant of bail on the ground that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and the circumstances strongly indicate involvement of this petitioner and another in committing the murder of Chetan. He has very heavily relied on the statement of CW2-Mallesh who is stated to be very 3 close to accused nos.1 and 2. It is an extra-judicial confession stated to have been recorded by the police on 10.4.2013.

4. What is stated by CW2 to the police is that the 1st accused came to him on 7.4.2013 and confessed to him about the murder of Chetan committed by him by using a knife. According to the learned HCGP, this is an important material and it is too premature to disbelieve the same.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the extra-judicial confession is not admissible evidence. Extra-judicial confession may be weak evidence but not inadmissible. The entire investigation is completed an charge sheet is filed. Anyhow the accused is in judicial custody for the past two years and has undertaken to obey any condition that may be imposed. Thus the apprehension of the learned HCGP could be met by imposing suitable conditions.

6. Accordingly the petition under Section 439, Cr.P.C. is allowed, and the petitioner is granted bail subject to the following conditions:

1) He shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

2) He shall mark his attendance once in 15 days in the jurisdictional police station between 9.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till closing of the case;

3) He shall not hold out threat to prosecution witnesses or tamper with evidence;

4) He shall attend the court on all dates of hearing, except under unavoidable circumstances.

5) If he violates any of the above conditions, prosecution will be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.

Sd/-

JUDGE vgh*

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court