Karnataka High Court
Lakshminarasimha vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 July, 2020
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K.Somashekar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2912 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
LAKSHMINARASIMHA
SON OF MUTTARASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
RESIDING AT: NO.20, MACHOHALLI COLONY
MACHOHALLI
BENGALURU - 562 130
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: RAVINDRA B DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MADANAYAKANAHALLY POLICE STATION
NELAMANGALA SUB DIVISION
BENGALURU DISTRICT - 562 123.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI: K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.162 OF
2019 REGISTERED BY MADANAYAKANAHALLY POLICE
2
STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 341, 114, 302, 109,
120B READ WITH 149 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by petitioner-accused No.8 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in Crime No.162 of 2019 of Madanayakanahally Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 114, 302, 109, 120B read with section 149 of IPC. The petitioner is said to be in judicial custody since from the date of his arrest.
2. Factual matrix of the petition is as under:
It is stated in the complaint that, the deceased Lakshminarayana and the accused persons were the residents of Machohalli Colony and they were having long standing enmity between them with reference to Sy.No.88 with regard to the cultivation of a Government gomal land. It is in these background, on 15.04.2019 at about 2.00 3 p.m. all the accused persons have formed an unlawful assembly and when the deceased Lakshminarayana was proceeding on his two wheeler on Kabbehalla road in Machohalli colony towards his house, accused No.1 threw a stone on the deceased, due to which, the deceased fell down from his two wheeler. The other accused persons who were already waiting near the scene of offence in cars bearing registration No.KA 03/AC-6497 and KA 02/Z-8804, got down from the said vehicles armed with deadly weapons, such as, longs, choppers, knives etc., assaulted the deceased all over his body. Accused No.1 is said to have dropped the stone on the head of the deceased in order to eliminate him. It is further alleged that the petitioner is one of the conspirator and participant in the said assault.
3. In pursuance of the complaint filed by the complainant, a case in Crime No.162 of 2019 came to be registered for the aforesaid offences. Thereafter, the investigating officer took up the case for investigation and 4 thoroughly investigated the case and laid the charge sheet against the accused. In the said charge sheet, the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.8.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent State.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the accused is innocent person and he did not commit any offence as alleged and narrated in the complaint, so also as reflected in the charge sheet laid by the investigating officer. It is further contended that there are no specific grounds to believe that this petitioner has committed the alleged offence and caused injuries on the deceased. He submits that due to the enmity between the deceased and the accused persons, at the time of laying of charge sheet, this petitioner has been implicated in the alleged crime by setting up a theory. It is further contended that there was no motive on the part of the petitioner to commit the alleged offence and also to eliminate the deceased. However, the entire case of the 5 prosecution rests upon the circumstances and also the material available in the charge sheet laid by the investigating officer, there are no specific allegations made against this accused to commit the murder of the deceased. Subsequent to the registration of crime, the investigating officer has thoroughly investigated the case and also laid the charge sheet against the accused. In that, this petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.8 and he is in judicial custody since from the date of his arrest.
6. Petitioner's counsel further contends that the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Petition No.1399 of 2020 dated 04.03.2020, Criminal Petition No.8707 of 2019 dated 06.01.2020 and in Criminal Petition No.7726 of 2019 dated 27.11.2019. However, the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court by imposing stipulated conditions as stated therein. This petitioner-accused also stands in the similar footing as that of other co-accused. The only allegations 6 made against this petitioner-accused is that he was one of the conspirator. Therefore, on the ground of parity, he seeks bail by imposing certain suitable conditions to this petitioner-accused No.8 who is in judicial custody since from the date of his arrest. Lastly, he contends that the petitioner is ready to abide by any terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court while considering this bail petition. The petitioner is the permanent abode of Machohalli Colony, Bengaluru. He hails from respectable family and he is also having movable and immovable properties. These are all the contentions as taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and seeks for allowing this petition by granting bail to the petitioner.
7. Per contra, learned HCGP for the State contends that the allegations against this petitioner- accused No.8 would indicate that this accused along with the other accused persons have formed an unlawful assembly and have assaulted the deceased. The main allegation against this petitioner-accused is that he was 7 the conspirator for the alleged crime. During the course of investigation, the investigating officer has recorded the statement of CWs-7 to 9 and 24. The other witnesses have also given the statement before the investigating officer during the course of investigation relating to the aforesaid crime so also relating to the elimination of deceased Lakshminarayana on the ground that the accused as well as deceased were having enmity with regard to the gomal land and accused were grinding axes against the deceased to eliminate him. He submits that the material on record indicates that this petitioner being arraigned as accused No.8 was present at the scene of offence. It is further contended that the statement of witness, namely, Mahalakhsmi, who is none other than the daughter of the deceased, has given statement relating to the incident said to have been taken place and so also the involvement of this petitioner in the said crime. Therefore, he contends that if the accused is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of the prosecution case and try to destroy the evidence. Hence, 8 he contends that the accused is not deserving for bail. Therefore, on all these grounds, learned HCGP seeks for dismissal of the petition.
8. It is in this context of the contentions as taken by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the State, it is relevant to refer to the FIR and charge sheet laid by the investigating officer. On the fateful day, when the deceased Lakshminarayana was proceeding on his two wheeler on Kabbehalla road in Machohalli colony towards his house, accused No.1 threw a stone on the deceased, due to which, the deceased fell down from his two wheeler. The other accused persons who were already waiting near the scene of offence got down from the cars armed with deadly weapons, such as, longs, choppers, knives etc., assaulted the deceased all over his body. Accused No.1 is said to have dropped the stone on the head of the deceased in order to eliminate him. It is further alleged that the petitioner is one of the conspirator and participant in the said assault. The co-accused have 9 already been granted bail by this Court by imposing stipulated conditions. On perusal of the entire material available on record and so also the statement of CW-2, who has given statement before the investigating officer during the course of investigation, the involvement of this petitioner in the alleged crime is not forthcoming. The witnesses have not stated anything about the presence of this accused. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has taken me through the material secured by the investigating officer during the course of investigation. CW-2 is said to be the eye witness to the incident. Her statement has been recorded on 19.11.2019, the statement of CWs-3 and 4 have been recorded on 22.04.2019 and the statement of CW-5 has been recorded on 28.04.2019. However, the statement of CW-2, who is none other than the daughter of the deceased was mainly concentrated by the learned High Court Government Pleader relating to the presence of this accused, as she was the eye witness to the said incident. The incident has taken place relating to the cultivation of gomal land. In 10 this context, the accused persons were forcing and attempting to sell the gomal land, for that, the deceased Lakshminarayana and other witnesses, such as, Cws-7 to 10 and 24 were obstructing them. However, all these facts have to be taken into consideration at the time of full- fledged trial. Therefore, at this stage, it does not require any detailed discussion relating to the materials secured by the investigating officer who has laid the charge sheet to consider the bail petition. It appears that there is substance in the contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner for bail. But the learned HCGP submits that if this petitioner/accused No.8 is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and destroy the evidence. This apprehension expressed by learned HCGP could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution.
9. For the aforesaid reasons as well as under the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the 11 opinion that petitioner/accused No.8 is deserving for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition filed by the petitioner-accused No.8 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed, subject to the following conditions:
i) Petitioner/Accused No.8 shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, with a likesum surety to the satisfaction of the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM Court, Nelamangala, Bengaluru Rural District relating to Crime No.162 of 2019 of Madanayakanahally Police Station;
ii) Petitioner/Accused No.8 shall not tamper or hamper with the case of prosecution witnesses.
iii) Petitioner/Accused No.8 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission from the competent court of law.
iv) Petitioner/Accused No.8 shall appear before the Court of law on all the dates of hearing. 12
v) Petitioner/Accused No.8 shall not indulge in any criminal activities, henceforth.
If Petitioner/Accused No.8 violates any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.
Sd/-
JUDGE *bgn/-