Karnataka High Court
Rajesh @ Ajay vs State Of Karnataka on 15 April, 2024
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:15150
CRL.P No. 1068 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1068 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
RAJESH @ AJAY
S/O SOMACHAR
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/A NO.125, NEAR GOVERNMENT
SCHOOL, SOMASHETTY HALLI
CHIKKA BAANAVARA POST
BENGALURU - 90.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI VINAYA B.R, ADV.)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SOLADEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
Digitally signed HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
by PAVITHRA AT BENGALURU - 560 001.
N ...RESPONDENT
Location: HIGH
COURT OF (BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP)
KARNATAKA
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC PRAYING TO RELEASED HIM
ON BAIL, WHO IS ACCUSED NO.1 IN CR.NO.279/2022
(S.C.NO.85/2023) REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT SOLADEVANAHALLI
POLICE STATION, NOW PENDING ON IX ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302, 201, 34 OF IPC IN RESPECT OF
PETITIONER.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:15150
CRL.P No. 1068 of 2024
ORDER
1. Accused No.1 in S.C.No.85/2023 pending before the Court of IX Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bengalure Rural District arising out of Crime No.279/2022 registered by Soladevanahally Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 R/w Section 34 of IPC is before this Court seeking regular bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. On the basis of complaint lodged by Kadegwda S/o Manchegowda dated 30.11.2022, Soladevanahally Police had registered FIR in Crime No.279/2022 against the petitioner and another for the aforesaid offences. In the complaint, it is averred that complainant's brother Desigowda was married to accused No.2 Jayalakshmi and from their wedlock they have son by name Chidananda, who is aged about 16 years. Accused No.2 - Jayalakshmi, wife of Desigowda had illicit relationship with the petitioner herein and having come to know about the same, there was a quarrel between deceased Desigowda and his wife Jayalakshmi. On 27.11.2022, Jayalakshmi telephoned the complainant and informed him that Desigowda, who had -3- NC: 2024:KHC:15150 CRL.P No. 1068 of 2024 left the house on the said date at about 5.30 a.m, has not been receiving phone call, and therefore, asked the complainant to search for him. Thereafter, Jayalakshmi allegedly gave a missing complaint before the Soladevanahally Police on 28.11.2022. On 30.11.2022, the dead body of the Desigowda was found in the drain besides Bengaluru - Mysuru national highway. Immediately, the complainant went to the spot and after identifying the dead body lodged complaint and in the complaint he has stated that he suspects the hands of accused persons in the murder of Desigowda. During the course of investigation, the accused persons were arrested. The police after completion of investigation have filed charge sheet and the case is now pending before the Trial Court in S.C.No.85/2023.
4. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in Crl.P.No.3964/2023 and the same was dismissed on 08.08.2023. This is the successive bail application filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that accused no.2 has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in -4- NC: 2024:KHC:15150 CRL.P No. 1068 of 2024 Crl.A.No.345/2024. Petitioner is in custody for the last more than a year. He, accordingly prays to allow the petition.
6. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition. She submits that this is a successive bail application, and therefore, unless the petitioner points out a change in circumstance, his bail application cannot be entertained.
7. Accused no.2 is a lady. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted regular bail to her taking into consideration that she is a lady and the charge sheet discloses that act of strangulation was allegedly done by accused no.1. Therefore, the fact that accused no.2 has been granted regular bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court cannot be a ground for considering the successive bail application of the petitioner.
8. The petitioner has not pointed out any change in circumstance except stating that accused no.2 has been granted regular bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court after the bail application of the petitioner in Crl.P.No.3964/2023 was dismissed by this Court on 08.08.2023.
9. It is trite that unless the accused points out change in circumstances in the successive bail application, the same -5- NC: 2024:KHC:15150 CRL.P No. 1068 of 2024 cannot be entertained. In the present case, except stating that accused no.2 has been granted regular bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court subsequent to the dismissal of Crl.P.No.3964/2023, the petitioner has not pointed out any change in circumstance. As stated earlier, accused no.2 has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court taking into consideration that she is a woman and the allegation of strangulation of the deceased is only as against accused no.1. Therefore, I do not see any good reason to entertain this successive bail application by the petitioner who is accused no.1 in the present case. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE KK