Karnataka High Court
Suresh @ Suri @ Dicchi Suri vs State Of Karnataka on 16 February, 2023
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 146 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SURESH @ SURI @ DICCHI SURI
S/O SRINIVAS
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/AT K R LAYOUT
MADHUGIRI TOWN
MADHUGIRI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISRICT -572 132.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MAHESH S N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MADHUGIRI POLICE STATION
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
Digitally signed REPTD BY GOVT PLEADER
by SANDHYA S HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
Location: HIGH BANGALORE CITY -560 091
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 2. MARAKKA
W/O VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
RESIDING AT KARADIPURA VILLAGE
MADHGIURI TOWN
MADHUGIRI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT -572 132.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S VISWA MUTHRY, HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
-2-
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN
CRL.MISC.NO.1693/2022 DATED 02.12.2022 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
TUMAKURU AND PLEASED TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL WHICH
IS PENDING IN SPL.C.NO.136/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
302 AND 201 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3(2)(va) OF SC/ST
(POA) ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, TUMAKURU.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of both learned counsel, it is taken up for final disposal.
2. This appeal is filed by accused No.7 challenging the order dated 02.12.2022 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1693/2022 by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru in respect of crime No.3/2022 of Madhugiri P.S. for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and under Section 3(2)(v)(a) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989. -3- CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
3. Heard the learned counsel for appellant and learned HCGP for respondent No.1-State.
4. Inspite of service of notice to respondent No.2 remained absent and unrepresented.
5. The case of the prosecution is that accused No.2 was in love with Ms. X and the deceased Ravi had eloped with Ms.X who was a minor and a case came to be registered against him and he was released on bail and therefore, accused No. 2 was having grudge against the deceased Ravi. Accused No. 1 was also having previous enimity with the deceased Ravi. As the deceased Ravi, after his release on bail, had put the photo of one Maruti @ Polard by writing `My Boss', accused Nos. 1 to 7 along with juvenile offender conspired and on 11.01.2022 assaulted him with hands. Accused No. 1 assaulted with fist on the face of the deceased. They changed his clothes and took him to hospital where he was reported brought dead. A charge sheet came to be filed against the -4- CRL.A No. 146 of 2023 appellant and other accused for the offence punishable under Sections 201 and 302 of IPC and Section 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
6. Appellant/accused No.7 came to be arrested on 22.09.2022 and he is in judicial custody. Appellant/accused No.5 filed Crl.Misc.No.1693/2022 seeking bail and the same came to be rejected by impugned order dated 02.12.2022 and the said order is challenged in the instant appeal.
7. Learned counsel for appellant would contend that no serious overtacts are alleged against the appellant/accused No.7 and serious overt acts are alleged against accused No.1 who is stated to have assaulted the deceased with fist on his neck and head. It is his further submission that accused Nos.5 and 6 who are similarly placed as that of appellant/accused No.7 have been granted bail by this Court in Crl.A.No.2035/2022 and Crl.A.No.1387/2022. Therefore, he seeks grant of bail on the ground of parity.
-5-CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
8. It is his further submission that the statement of alleged eye witnesses CWs. 7 to 9 have been recorded on 22.03.2022 and it is after arrest of the appellant and other accused. Without considering all these aspects learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order which requires interference by this Court.
9. Per contra, learned HCGP for respondent No.1- State would contend that CWs.7 to 9 are eye witnesses to the incident and they have specifically stated the name of this appellant/accused No.7 and other accused assaulting the deceased Ravi with hands and taking him in a Autorickshaw. The said statements of CWs.7 to 9 clearly shows the participation of this appellant/accused No.7 in the commission of murder of the deceased - Ravi. There is also an allegation that this appellant/accused No.7 and other accused took the injured Ravi by changing his clothes to the hospital stating that he has sustained injuries in an accident and tried to disappear the evidence. -6- CRL.A No. 146 of 2023 Considering all these aspects learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order which does not call for interference by this Court. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
10. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for appellant and learned HCGP for respondent No.1-State this Court has gone through the impugned order and the charge sheet records.
11. The accusations leveled against appellant/accused No.7 is that he along with accused Nos.1 to 6 and child offender assaulted the deceased with hands. There is no serious overt acts are alleged against this appellant/accused No.7. Serious overt acts are alleged against accused No.1 who is stated to have assaulted the deceased with club on his head and neck. Accused Nos.5 and 6 who were similarly placed to that of appellant/accused No.7 have been granted bail by this Court in Crl.A.No.2035/2022 and Crl.A.No.1387/2022 and therefore, this appellant/accused No.7 is entitled for bail -7- CRL.A No. 146 of 2023 on the ground of parity. The apprehension of the prosecution is that if appellant/accused No.7 is granted bail, there is threat to the prosecution witnesses can be met by imposing stringent conditions. Without considering all these aspects, learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order which requires interference by this Court.
12. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the learned counsel for the parties, there are valid grounds for setting aside the impugned order and granting bail to appellant/accused No.7 subject to terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Appeal is allowed.
The order dated 02.12.2022 passed by III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, in Crl.Misc.No.1693/2022 is set aside and appellant/accused No.7 is granted bail in Crime -8- CRL.A No. 146 of 2023 No.03/2022 of Madhugiri Police station subject to the following conditions:
i. The appellant/accused No. 7 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh (Rupees One lakh only) with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii. The appellant/accused No. 7 shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses. iii. The appellant/accused No. 7 shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted by the Court and cooperate for the speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE SSD