Karnataka High Court
Pratapa vs State Of Karnataka on 20 March, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:11439
CRL.P No. 447 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 447 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
PRATAPA,
S/O NAGARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
R/AT: NERALURU VILLAGE,
NEAR MARIYAMMA TEMPLE,
ATTIBELE HOBLI,
ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL - 562 106.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. KRISHNE GOWDA M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
STATE BY ANEKAL P.S.,
RPTD. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
Digitally signed BANGALORE - 560 001.
by V KRISHNA
...RESPONDENT
Location: High (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)
Court of
Karnataka
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.5045/2022
(CR.NO.2/2022) OF ANEKAL P.S., BENGALURU RURAL FOR THE
OFFENCES P/U/Ss.302, 109, 120B R/W. 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF
THE III ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU
RURAL SIT AT ANEKAL ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:11439
CRL.P No. 447 of 2024
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.8 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for granting bail in Crime No.02/2022 registered by Anekal Police Station, Bengaluru Rural and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 109, 120/B read with 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent - State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint filed by the complainant, the Police have registered an FIR. It is alleged that accused No.1 having enmity in respect of the land. The deceased Rajashekar Reddy was care taker of the land belongs to one Padma, the complainant. As per the complaint filed on 05.01.2022, it is alleged that the deceased was appointed for looking after the affairs of the property and the deceased left in the Swift Car for getting a legal opinion from the Advocate -3- NC: 2024:KHC:11439 CRL.P No. 447 of 2024 for sale of property. At about 8:13 p.m., she got information that her secretary was done to death in the driver seat of the car itself. Accordingly, a complaint came to be filed. During investigation, it reveals that accused No.1 having given the contract to accused Nos.4 to 6 through accused No.8 for committing the murder, accordingly, this petitioner said to be taken money and given to accused Nos.4 to 6 for committing the murder. Accordingly, accused Nos.4 to 6 have committed the murder. This petitioner is in judicial custody from 23.01.2022. His earlier bail petition came to be rejected by giving liberty and the petitioner is before this Court once again on the ground that this Court has already granted bail to co-accused Nos.1 and 2. Therefore, on the ground of parity, this petitioner prays for grant of bail.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the liberty was granted by this Court to this petitioner to approach this Court after examination of four witnesses was over. In the meanwhile, this Court granted -4- NC: 2024:KHC:11439 CRL.P No. 447 of 2024 bail to accused Nos.1 and 2. Therefore, on the ground of parity, he is entitled for bail. The evidence also started. The independent witnesses were not supported the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, keeping the petitioner in custody for more than 1½ years will not serve any purpose. Therefore, he is entitled for bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader has opposed the bail petition.
6. Having heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State and perused the records, the allegation made in the charge sheet, wherein the petitioner states that the accused Nos.1 and 2, commit the murder of deceased Rajashekar Reddy, he was a care taker of the land belongs to Smt.Padma. Therefore, accused No.3, said to be the son of accused No.1, who has contacted accused No.8, the present petitioner in turn this petitioner agreed to commit the murder by receiving an amount of Rs.1 crore as -5- NC: 2024:KHC:11439 CRL.P No. 447 of 2024 contract amount and a site and also a house will be constructed in a site are the charges for committing the murder. Accordingly, this petitioner said to be issued part by part payment of Rs.4½ Lakhs and given to accused Nos.4 to 6. Therefore, accused Nos.4 to 6 have committed the murder. He was arrested on 21.08.2020 and he was in a judicial custody. His earlier bail petition was dismissed by giving liberty to approach the Court after examination of four witnesses. However, presently only two witnesses have been examined viz., CW.1 and CW.2. This Court granted bail to accused No.1 on medical grounds. Accused No.2 is a LL.B., student, who said to be only introduced accused No.8 to the father of accused No.1. But on perusal of the records, it reveals that this petitioner is a main person behind the commission of murder, who had contacted accused No.1 and settle the issue for a sum of Rs.1 crore for a supari and a site as well as a house will be constructed in the said site. He himself received an amount of Rs.4.5 Lakhs from accused No.1 and paid to the contract killers. The Police during the investigation -6- NC: 2024:KHC:11439 CRL.P No. 447 of 2024 recovered Rs.20,000/- from this petitioner and the photograph of the deceased along with mobile phone. The investigation paper reveals prima facie the petitioner for having been committed the murder through accused Nos.4 to 6, who were contract killers he himself received the ransom for committing the murder in this case. If bail is granted, there is every possibility of tampering the witnesses and committing the similar offences are not ruled out. Hence, it is not a fit case for granting bail. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER The petition is rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE CP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9 CT:SNN