Karnataka High Court
Kiran @ Beggar vs State Of Karnataka on 30 October, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:43792
CRL.A No. 1666 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1666 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
KIRAN @ BEGGAR
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
CHAMUNDESHWARI CHIKEN CENTER
VIDHYANAGAR, MYSORE CITY
KARNATAKA - 570 029.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI AKSHAY KOLLE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY NAZARABAD POLICE STATION
Digitally signed by MYSURU
LAKSHMINARAYANA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
COURT OF HIGH COURT BUILDING
KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. BHANUMATI M
W/O LATE B M DORESWAMY
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
R/AT No.210, 6TH CROSS
VIDYANAGAR, NAZARBAD MOHALLA
MYSORE - 570 029.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI A VENKAT SATHYANARAYAN, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:43792
CRL.A No. 1666 of 2024
THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF
SC/ST (POA) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE REJECTION OF BAIL
APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT UNDER SECTION 439
OF Cr.P.C. VIDE ORDER DATED 01.04.2024 BY THE VI
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SPECIAL JUDGE, MYSURU IN
SPECIAL CASE No.690/2023 ARISING OUT OF CR.No.90/2023
REGISTERED AT NAZARBAD P.S., MYSORE DISTRICT,
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by accused No. 3 praying to set aside the order dated 01.04.2024 passed in Spl.C. No. 690/2023 by VI Additional District and Special Judge, Mysuru, whereunder the bail application of this appellant - accused No. 3 sought in respect of crime No.90/2023 of Nazarabad Police Station registered for offence punishable under Sections 341, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v-a) of Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the SC ST (POA) Act') came to be rejected.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:43792 CRL.A No. 1666 of 2024
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant - accused No. 3 and learned HCGP for respondent No. 1 - State. Inspite of service of notice respondent No. 2 remained absent and unrepresented.
3. As per column No. 17 of charge sheet case of the prosecution is that on 18.08.2023 deceased - Balaraj had gone to Ooty and when he did not return, C.W.1 - mother of deceased - Balaraj asked accused Nos. 1 and 2 who were acquainted with the deceased, to make a phone call to the deceased - Balaraj and they contacted Balaraj over phone and gave it to C.W.1, Balaraj told her that he was still in Ooty. Thereafter, on 19.08.2023 accused Nos. 1 and 2 made phone call over mobile of deceased - Balaraj, at that time, there was a quarrel between them over phone. In that regard, on 19.08.2023, at about 09.20 pm, the deceased - Balarj came to Mysuru and when he was in a circle, at that time, accused Nos.1 to 3 were waiting for him and started quarrelling with the deceased
- Balaraj and abused him in filthy language. At that time, -4- NC: 2024:KHC:43792 CRL.A No. 1666 of 2024 accused No.1 made phone call to his father - accused No. 4 and informed him that the deceased - Balaraj was abusing him in filthy language. Accused No. 4 came to the main road of Vidyanagar and when the deceased - Balraj was going on the said road, accused Nos.1 to 3 were following him and at that time, accused No. 1 told his father - accused No. 4 to catch hold of the deceased - Balaraj and accused No. 4 caught hold of the deceased - Balaraj and at that time accused No. 1 quarreled with the deceased - Balaraj and took knife which was with accused No. 2 and slashed on the neck of the deceased and caused injury. When the deceased was running to escape from them, at that time this accused No. 3 held the leg of the deceased and made him to fall and at that time, accused No.2 took knife from accused No.1 and assaulted with the said knife on right rib of deceased - Balaraj. Thereafter, when the deceased - Balaraj tried to escape, accused Nos. 2 and 3 made him to fall and at that time again accused No.2 assaulted the deceased on his leg and other parts with knife. The deceased succumbed to the injuries -5- NC: 2024:KHC:43792 CRL.A No. 1666 of 2024 sustained. Appellant - accused No. 3 who was arrested on 20.08.2023 is in judicial custody and had filed bail application along with accused No. 2 and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order. Said order has been challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for appellant - accused No. 3 would contend that no serious overt act is alleged against this appellant - accused No. 3 and there are no criminal antecedents. He has submitted that accused No. 3 cooperated with the Police in the investigation. As charge sheet is filed appellant - accused No. 3 is not required for custodial interrogation. Appellant - accused No. 3 was not part of any quarrel between deceased - Balaraj and accused Nos. 1 and 2. With this he prayed to allow the appeal and grant bail to appellant - accused No. 3.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that appellant - accused No. 3 made the deceased - Balaraj to fall by pulling his leg and facilitated accused Nos. 1 and 2 -6- NC: 2024:KHC:43792 CRL.A No. 1666 of 2024 to assault him with knife. C.W.2 and C.W.3 are eye witnesses to the incident. Charge sheet material show prima facie case against this appellant - accused No. 3 and other accused. With this he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties this Court has perused the impugned order and charge sheet material.
7. As per column No. 17 of the charge sheet and considering the statements of the eye witnesses - C.W.2 and C.W.3, it is clear that no serious overt act is alleged against appellant - accused No. 3. Serious overt act is alleged against accused Nos.1 and 2 who are alleged to have assaulted the deceased - Balaraj with knife. Allegation against this appellant - accused No.3 is pulling the leg of the deceased - Balaraj and making him to fall on the ground. As charge sheet is filed, appellant - accused No.3 is not required for custodial interrogation. Considering all these, the appellant - accused No.3 has -7- NC: 2024:KHC:43792 CRL.A No. 1666 of 2024 made out grounds for setting aside the impugned order and grant of bail.
8. In the result, the following;
ORDER The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 01.04.2024 passed in Spl.C. No. 690/2023 by VI Additional District and Special Judge, Mysuru, is set aside insofar as appellant - accused No. 3 is concerned. Consequently, the bail application filed by appellant - accused No.3 is allowed and he is ordered to be released on bail in crime No. 90/2023 of Nazarabad Police Station (pending in Spl.C. No. 690/2023) subject to following conditions:
i. The appellant - accused No. 3 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
ii. The appellant - accused No. 3 shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.-8-
NC: 2024:KHC:43792 CRL.A No. 1666 of 2024 iii. The appellant - accused No. 3 shall appear before the trial Court on all dates of hearing, unless exempted and cooperate in speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE LRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10