Karnataka High Court
Ravi @ Jaisingh Ravi vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 November, 2020
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5269/2020
BETWEEN:
Ravi @ Jaisingh Ravi
S/o Ashirwadam
Aged about 52 years
R/at Paramankurichi Village
Maravanvilai, Tiruchendur Taluk
Thoothukudi District
Tamil Nadu State.
...Petitioner
(By Sri B.S.Prasad, Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka
by Narasimharaja Police Station,
Mysuru City,
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Complex
Bengaluru-560 001.
...Respondent
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime
No.46/2020 (C.C.No.2188/2020) of Narasimharaja Police
Station, Mysuru City, for the offence punishable under
Section 302 of Indian Penal Code.
-2-
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following:-
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner- accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to release him on bail in Crime No.46/2020 of Narasimharaja Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (pending on the file of III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Mysuru.
2. I have heard the learned counsel Sri.Prasad B.S. for the petitioner-accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader Sri.Mahesh Shetty for the respondent- State.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 22.3.2020 the petitioner-accused and deceased were consuming alcohol in the 2nd floor of the shed of their factory. CWs.5 and 6 were in the ground floor, they heard quarreling of the deceased with the petitioner. They kept quit thinking that -3- the quarrel was after consumption of the alcohol. At about 11.30 a.m. the petitioner-accused called the complainant and informed that he wants to go back to his place to bring some more workers and went away and in the afternoon CW.6 went near the place and saw bleeding from the nose of the deceased and informed the same to CW.5 and the same has been informed to the complainant. Complainant came to the place and after noticing the same, filed the complaint.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that there are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and the entire case rests on circumstantial evidence. There is no ill-will or rivalry and intention to cause the death. It is his further submission that the opinion expressed by the doctor indicates that the death of the deceased is as a result of blunt force sustained to the chest. No articles have been seized which was the blunt object which has been used for the purpose of assault on -4- the chest. It is his further submission that there is delay in filing the complaint and even the presence of the petitioner-accused at that point of time is also creates a doubt. He is ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to offer the sureties. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner-accused on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that there are circumstances to show that the petitioner-accused and the deceased were last seen together and next day the deceased was found dead. That itself clearly indicates that the petitioner-accused with an intention to done away with the life of the deceased has assaulted and has stampede the deceased when he fell down on the chest by wearing the footwear and as a result of the same the deceased has suffered with blunt injuries on the chest and as a result of the same he died. There is corroboration with the medical -5- evidence. On these grounds he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. On perusal of the records it indicates that already the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed. Admittedly there are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and entire case rests on circumstantial evidence. On close reading of the charge sheet material it indicates that the deceased died due to hemopneumothorax as a result of blunt force impact sustained to chest. The prosecution has intending to rely upon only on the circumstances of last seen together, but as per the contents of the complaint the petitioner-accused by informing the complainant at about 11.30 a.m. went away and even when the galata took place in the night hours between the petitioner-accused and the deceased, -6- CWs.4 and 5 were present, they were not intervened to pacify the said quarrel and even they have not bothered to go to the upstairs and see what has happened, on the next day also they have not gone and see, only in the afternoon surprisingly they went and saw the deceased. When he left the place, thereafter what has happened is not forthcoming. Under such circumstances it creates a doubt in the case of the prosecution. In that light, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner-accused has made out a case to release him on bail.
8. In that light, this petition is allowed. The petitioner-accused is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.46/2020 of Narasimharaja Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (pending on the file of III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Mysuru, subject to the following conditions:
i) Petitioner-accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.-7-
ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
iv) He shall mark his attendance before the jurisdictional police on 1st of every month in between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till the trial is completed.
v) He shall not indulge in similar type of criminal activities. If he again indulged in similar type of criminal activities or violates any one of the conditions, the trial Court is at liberty to cancel the bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE *AP/-