Karnataka High Court
Mr. Vasantappa Malleppa Bhovi vs State Of Karnataka on 8 August, 2017
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101587/2017
BETWEEN:
1. MR. VASANTAPPA MALLEPPA BHOVI
AGE: 38 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE & COOLIE,
R/O: HALLUR, TQ: HIREKERUR,
DIST: HAVERI.
2. SMT.KAVITA W/O VASANTAPPAP BHOVI
AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD & COOLIE,
R/O: HALLUR, TQ: HIREKERUR,
DIST: HAVERI.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI NEELENDRA D.GUNDE, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY RATIHALLI POLICE,
REPRESENTED BY THE
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, HCGP)
:2:
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO GRANT BAIL TO PETITIONER
IN CRIME NO.46 OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF RATTIHALLI
POLICE BEING TRIED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 302 READ WITH 34 OF IPC AND 210
READ WITH 120-B OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC, HIREKERUR.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This is the petition filed by petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B read with Section 34 of I.P.C. registered in respondent-Police Station Crime No.46/2017.
2. Looking to the materials, the factual story of the prosecution that P.S.I., Rattihalli Police Station lodged the complaint on 26.04.2017 stating that one Smt.Bhagya the wife of the deceased came to the police station on 19.04.2017 and reported the death of her husband who might have been murdered by some :3: persons and on that basis UDR No.7/2017 was registered and investigating agency has took up the investigation. During investigation the dead body of the deceased was found lying in a heap of bush, near petrol bunk of Hallur village on 19.04.2017, the wife has identified the dead body after she verifying the cloths, found the cell phone in the pocket of the deceased as the dead body is of her husband. Police have suspected the attitude of Bhagya-wife of the deceased as she denied to identify the dead body of her husband. Thereafter, the Investigation Officer has interrogated the accused No.5 to 7 on 25.04.2016 by calling them to Rattihalli Police Station who have disclosed the real facts of the case and also disclosed that death of Kumar was due to assault on 14.04.2017 at 8.30 p.m. and it reveals from the investigation, wherein accused persons have been arrested in Crime No.46/2017 on 26.04.2017 and they are in judicial custody. From perusal of the voluntary statement of the accused clearly connects the :4: accused. So on the basis of the voluntary statements the present petitioners are also arrayed as accused in the said case and case came to be registered and other accused persons i.e. accused No.5, 6 and 7 are also arrested in the case in connection with the said incident.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners-accused No.2 and 4 and also the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent- State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners today filed the memo by producing the charge sheet material, so it goes to show that now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed in the case. Perusing the charge sheet materials and the statement of witnesses more particularly the statement of one Ganesh whose statement has been recorded by the Investigation Officer during investigation, who said to be :5: the eyewitness in the incident, it also prima facie goes to show that at this stage that it is accused No.1 the mother-in-law of the deceased assaulted the deceased by using arecanut dried tree branch and after she assaulted on the face, the teeth were also broken and deceased sustained injury on his face and mouth and he was dead. Looking to the entire prosecution material, the material prima facie goes to show that assault is by accused No.1. There is no other material to show that other accused persons have also assaulted the deceased with an intention to cause his death. Even looking to the further statement of the witnesses what is stated at the end of the further statement that they came to know about the same from the villagers and even the assault said to have been by accused No.1, it is in connection with that the deceased used to come to the house consuming alcohol and he has sold the Television and DVD. But the materials no doubt goes to show prima facie that the petitioners along with other accused :6: persons joined hands in transporting the dead body of the deceased to a particular place. Even there is a material which goes to show that even the wife of the deceased was hesitant to identify the body of her husband and it is she who filed the first report making false averments on the basis of which UDR case came to be registered. Even considering the entire charge sheet material at this stage they clearly goes to show prima facie assault is by accused No.1 and the other accused joined the hands in shifting the dead body of the deceased. Therefore, so far as the present petitioners are concerned at the most their role is for the offences under Section 201 and 120B of the I.P.C. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed.
5. Petitioners have contended that they are innocent and not involved in committing the alleged offences and they are ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by this Court. I have also :7: perused the post mortem report and opinion of the Doctor. The Doctor has mentioned that the opinion regarding cause of death is kept pending till receipt of the FSL report. Therefore, considering all these aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that by imposing reasonable conditions petitioners who are accused No.2 and 4 can be enlarged on regular bail.
6. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.46/2017 registered by the respondent Police for the above said offences, subject to following conditions:
i. Each petitioner has to execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and furnish one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of concerned Court.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioners shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/-
JUDGE CLK