Karnataka High Court
Kashinath. H. B. @ Kashi vs State Of Karnataka on 25 August, 2022
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5234 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1 . KASHINATH. H. B. @ KASHI
S/O BADRINARYANA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
2 . MANJUNATH H B
S/O BADRINARYANA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/A HOLALU VILLAGE
DUDDA HOBLI
MANDYA DISTRICT-571401.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. RAKSHA KEERTHA, ADV. FOR
SRI. KEMPARAJU, ADV.)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MANDYA WEST POLICE STATION
REP BY ITS PUBIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BENGALURU-560001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.R.D. RENUKARADHYA, HCGP.)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.198/2021 REGISTERED BY
MANDYA WEST POLICE STATION, MANDYA FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS. 143, 148, 341,
323, 504, 201, 302 R/W 149 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE
FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND C.J.M.
COURT, MANDYA IN C.C.NO.2526/2022.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.6 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in Crime No.198/2021 registered by Mandya West Police Station, Mandya for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 341, 323, 504. 201, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that one Y.H.Ramakrishna lodged complaint to the police on 3 19.12.2021 alleging that his son Rakshith.Y.R. @ Rohit is said to have been murdered by accused Nos.1 to 5 when he was proceeding along with CW-2, Vinay at 10.30 near Railway Gate, Mandya. Someone intimated him about the incident and he went to the hospital and tried to shift his son to the General hospital, but he died on the way to the hospital and he mentioned the names of accused Nos.1 to
5. After registering the case, the police arrested these petitioners on 19.12.2021 and remanded them to judicial custody and other accused were also arrested. The bail petition of the petitioners came to be rejected and hence, they are before this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against them. They have been falsely implicated in the case. Accused No.4 is a Lab Technician working at MIMS and accused No.3 is said to be his brother and there is no specific overt act against them for having assaulted the 4 deceased and the allegation goes against the accused Nos.1 and 2, who assaulted and caused injuries. They are not rowdy sheeters. Investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed. They are in custody for almost 8 months. The bail petition of the petitioners came to be rejected and hence, they are before this Court.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the deceased is a rowdy sheeter and CWs-2 to 5 are also rowdy sheeters. During the quarrel, the offence was committed. They are ready to abide by any conditions imposed. Hence, sought for grant of bail.
6. The learned HCGP has seriously objected for grant of bail and contended that the petitioners are rowdy sheeters and they are gangsters of accused No.1. There was gang war between both the groups and committed murder. If the petitioners are released on bail, there is possibility of threatening CWs-2 to 5, who are eyewitness to the incident and accused persons also chased them to 5 commit their murder and they escaped and lodged complaint. If the petitioners are released, they will commit similar offences. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the petition.
7. Having heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and perused the material available on record it reveals that there was previous enmity between the deceased, accused No.1 and accused No.3 in respect of incident occurred with CWs-13 and 14, as the accused No.1 is said to have quarreled with them and same was questioned by this deceased and he is stated to have manhandled. Likewise when the accused No.3 quarreled with CW-24, the deceased intervened and assaulted him. This accused No.1 and 3 conspired with accused Nos.2, 4 and 5 to commit the murder, as the deceased was always intervening with his affairs and he is pretending to be a rowdy. Subsequently, 6 after knowing the deceased coming along with CW-2, Vinay the accused Nos.1 to 5 attacked them in two motorbikes. The deceased also tried to escape and he also took weapon for preattacking the accused persons. During the quarrel, accused Nos.3 to 5 along with petitioners caught hold of the deceased and facilitated the accused Nos.1 and 2 to stab him and committed murder. Subsequently, they have chased CWs-2 to 5 and they also ran away from the spot. There are four eye witnesses to the incident and the offences are alleged against the accused due to rival gang war between the two groups. If these petitioners are granted bail, every possibility of these petitioners threatening the witnesses CW-2 to 5, cannot be ruled out. Ofcourse, the deceased is also said to be rowdy sheeter accused No.1 is also a rowdy sheeter. It appears that both are rowdy gangs and they keep quarreling with each other and disturbing the peace and tranquality in public area. Therefore, if the petitioners are granted bail, every possibility of these petitioners attacking the witnesses or 7 the witnesses, who are also rowdy sheeters may also try to attack these petitioners, cannot be ruled out. In order to protect the witnesses or in the interest of the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
8. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are not entitled for grant of bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE DM/-