Karnataka High Court
Sunildatt S/O Marutirao Saraf vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 26 August, 2022
Author: P.N.Desai
Bench: P.N.Desai
1
IN T HE HIG H C OU RT OF KA RNAT AKA
KAL AB UR AG I BE NC H
DAT ED T HIS T HE 26 T H D AY OF AUG UST , 2022
BE FORE
THE HON'B LE MR. J UST IC E P .N.D E SA I
C RIM IN AL A PPE A L N o. 200131/2022
C /W
C RIM INAL A PPEA L N O.20013 5/2022
C RIM INAL A PPEA L N O.20014 8/2022
IN CRL.A NO 200131/2022:
BETWEEN:
SUNILDATT S/O MARUTIRAO SARAF
AGE. 44 YEARS,
OCCU. EDITOR NEWS PAPER,
R/O KANAKADAS BADAVANE,
VIJAYAPURA 586109
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. R. S. LAGALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE SHO,
VIJAYAPURA RURAL P.S
REP BY THE ADDL SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI 585102
2. SHRIMANT S/O RAMACHANDRA DHARASANG
AGE. 60 YEARS,
OCCU. PENSIONER,
R/O. GYANG BAWADI
VIJAYAPURA 585102
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.B.C.JAKA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
2
THIS CRL.A FILED U/SEC. 14-A(2) OF SC/ST (PA) ACT,
PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEAL SEEKING REGULAR
BAIL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 08.06.2022 PASSED IN
CRL.MISC.NO.609/2022 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. SESSIONS
COURT, VIJAYAPURA THEREBY ORDER THE RELEASE OF THE
APPELLANT ON BAIL IN VIJAYAPURA RURAL P.S. CRIME
NO.22/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL. SESSIONS
JUDGE/SPL. JUDGE, VIJAYAPURA FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/SEC.120B, 302,201,109 R/W 34 OF IPC ALONG WITH
SEC.3(2) (VA) OF SC/ST (PA) ACT.
IN CRL.A NO 200135/2022:
BETWEEN:
1. SACHIN S/O SHIVANINGAPPA
CHALAWADI, AGE 26 YEARS,
OCCU.BUSINESS,
2. PRAVEEN S/O SHANKAR CHALAWADI,
AGE 24 YEARS, OCC.STUDENT,
BOTH THE APPELLANTS ARE
R/O KAVALAGI VILLAGE,
TQ AND DIST.VIJAYAPURA-586109.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. R. S. LAGALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE SHO.,
VIJAYAPURA RURAL PS.,
REP. BY THE ADDL. STATE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI-585102.
3
2. SHRIMANT
S/O RAMACHANDRA DHARASANG,
AGE 60 YEARS, OCCU.PENSIONER,
R/O GYANG BAWDI,
VIJAYAPURA-586102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.B.C.JAKA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.A FILED U/SEC. 14-A OF SC/ST (PA) ACT,
PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEAL SEEKING REGULAR
BAIL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.06.2022 PASSED IN
CRL. MISC. NO. 705/2022 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. SESSIONS
COURT, VIJAYPAURA, THEREBY ORDER THE RELEASE OF THE
APPELLANTS ON BAIL IN VIJAYAPURA RURAL POLICE STATION,
CRIME NO. 22/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL.
SESSIONS JUDGE / SPECIAL JUDGE, AT VIJAYAPURA FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 120(B), 302, 201, 109, R/W SEC.
34 OF IPC, ALONG WITH SEC. 3(2)(VA) OF SC/ ST (PA) ACT, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN CRL.A.NO.200148/2022:
BETWEEN:
GURUSIDDA S/O APPASHY DONI
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HOLISANK,
NOW AT SAI HOTEL,
MANAGULI ROAD,
VIJAYAPUR 586 101
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S. S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE)
4
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE PSI,
VIJAYAPURA RURAL PS
REP BY THE ADDL
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI 585102
2. SHRIMANT S/O RAMACHANDRA DHARASANG
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
OCC.PENSIONER,
R/O GYANG BAWDI,
VIJAYAPURA 585102
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.B.C.JAKA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.A FILED U/SEC. 14-A OF SC/ST (PA) ACT,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.06.2022 PASSED
BY THE HONOURABLE II ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, AT VIJAYAPUR,
IN CRL. MISC. NO. 851/2022 AND CONSEQUENTLY ENLARGE THE
APPELLANT ON BAIL IN VIJAYAPUR RURAL PS. CRIME NO. 22/2022
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE /
SPECIAL JUDGE, AT VIJAYAPUR FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
U/SEC. 120(B), 302, 201, 109, R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC, AND U/SEC.
3(2)(VA) OF SC/ ST (POA) ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
THESE AP PEAL S C OMIN G ON FOR A D MISS ION T HIS
DAY , T HE C OURT D ELIVERE D THE FOLL OW I NG :
5
JU DG EMENT
Crimin al Ap peal No.200131/2022 filed by one
Sunild att who is arrayed as accused No.11; Criminal
Appeal No.200135/2022 filed by acc used No.8-
Sach in Chalaw ad i and accu sed No .9-Praveen
Chalaw adi; Criminal Ap peal No .200148/2022 filed b y
on e Gurusidd appa Doni und er Section 14(A)(2) of
the Sc heduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atro cities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter
referred to as 'S C/ST (POA) Act' for short) in Crime
No.22/2022 for the offences punishab le under
Section s 120B , 302, 201, 109 read with Section 34
of Indian Penal Code along with Section 3(2) (v-a) of
SC/ST (POA) Act.
2. The brief case of the p rosecu tion is th at
on e R amesh Dharasang h was a member of Dalit
asso ciatio n. It is alleged that on 01.02 .2022 th e
said d ecea sed -Ramesh in his f ace book account
posted some d efam atory words which is insulting to
the Dalita lead ers, p articularly accused No.2 by
name Jeetend ra Kamble. In this reg ard, accu sed
6
No.2 c alled th e d eceased over ph one and stated th at
he w ill teach him lesson. Accused No.2 also informed
his friends accused Nos.3 and 4 ab out p osting som e
defamato ry words and sen tenc es in the face book
and informed accused Nos.3 and 4 to call th e
deceas ed to Hitnalli road at Vijayapura. Acco rdin gly,
accused Nos.3 and 4 called accused No.1 near
Sind ag i byp ass road . It is further alleged that when
accused No.1 w as proc eeding on a scooty, he m et
accused No.11. The said accused No .11 told th at
deceas ed is p osting defam atory word s ag ains t
Jeetend ra Kamble. Th erefo re, they have to teach
him a lesso n and instigated them. Ac co rding ly,
accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 consp ired to take away th e
life of the d eceased and called the dec eased to
Sind ag i byp ass road . Accord ingly, deceas ed-Ram esh
came on his motorcycle. Then accused Nos .1, 3 and
4 took him to housing b oard situated in Hitnalli road
and at that time, they assau lted him w ith plastic
pipe. Then they c alled accused No.2 there. Accu sed
No.2 also abused Ram esh for posting def amato ry
7
sentenc es ag ain st him and he also assaulted him
with plas tic pip e. He went alo ng with accused No.1.
Accus ed Nos.3 and 4 kept Ram esh with them in a
house. T hey stayed nig ht there. They fou nd Ram esh
is d ead. On 02.02.2022 they called accus ed No.1.
Then, accused No.1 came in a car of one Santosh.
The said car d river refu sed to take the dead bo dy.
Then accused No.1 called accused Nos.5 and 6 and
requ ested th em to take the dead b ody of d eceased
and th ey went to Kavalag i villag e. T here accu sed
called accused Nos.7 to 10 and asked ac cused Nos.8
and 9 to show the house of d eceased w here th e
deceas ed was s taying . T hen accused Nos .1 and 5 to
10 th row the dea d body in front of his house and ran
aw ay. On the basis of the same, complaint lodged
by f ather of the dec eased, an FIR came to be
registered .
3. Thereafter th e p olice investig ated the c ase
and arrested eleven accused . After completing th e
investig ation, th e Investig ating Officer has filed th e
Charg e Sheet ag ainst th e accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 for
8
the off ences punish able under Section s 120B, 302,
201 read with S ection 34 of Indian P enal Code and
Section s 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act; ag ains t
accused No.2 f or the o ffences punishable under
Section s 302, 201 of IPC; and against accused Nos.5
to 10 for the offences pu nishab le und er S ections 201
of IPC; and agai nst accu sed No.11 for the offences
punishable under Sections 109 of IPC and 3(2)(va)
of SC/ST (POA) Act.
4. Accus ed No.5 is arrested o n 16.02.2022;
accused Nos.8 and 9 are arrested on 29.04.2022;
accused No.11 is arrested on 27 .04.2022; their bail
petitions cam e to be rejected by the learned
Sessions Judge. Hence, all the four accus ed who are
accused Nos.5, 8, 9 and 11 as referred above ha ve
preferred thes e three app eals seeking to enlarg e
them on b ail for the aforesaid offences.
5. Heard S ri.R.S.Lagali, learned counsel for
the appellants in Cril. Appeal No.200131/2022, Cril.
Appeal No .2001 35/2022 and Sri.S.S. Mam adap ur,
learn ed counsel for appellant in Cril.Appeal
9
No.200148/2022 and Sri.Gu ruraj V. Hasilkar, learned
Hig h Cou rt Government Pleader for the respondent-
State in all the three app eals and S ri.B.C.J aka,
learn ed counsel appearing to assist learned High
Court Govern ment Plead er on behalf of complainan t
who is fath er of deceased.
6. Learned coun sel for the app ellants argued
that th e en tire a llegatio ns of assault and overt acts
alleg ed are against on ly accus ed Nos.1 to 4. Th e
Charg e Sheet ag ainst accus ed Nos.1, 3 and 4 for th e
offences punis hable und er Sections 120B, 302, 201
read w ith Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and
Section s 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act; ag ains t
accused No.2 f or the o ffences punishable under
Section s 302, 201 of IPC; and against accused Nos.5
to 10 for the offences pu nishab le und er S ections 201
of IPC; and agai nst accu sed No.11 for the offences
punishable under Sections 109 of IPC and 3(2)(va)
of SC/ST (POA) Act is made ou t.
7. The alleged allegations ag ainst accused
Nos.5 to 10 is only u nder Section 201 of IPC and the
10
alleg ations ag ainst accused No.11 is und er Section
109 of IPC. Learn ed cou ns el argued that there are no
eyewitnesses to show the ro le of these app ellants in
this c ase. There is no material against these
app ellants to show that they have committed
offences whic h is pu nishab le with d eath or
imp risonme nt for life. Even the fu rther statem ents
of comp lainan t w hich are record ed twice shows th at
these app ellants were subsequen tly imp licated.
Except the alleg ed voluntary statem ents of these
accused and other accused , there is no material
ag ainst these ap pellants. There is no reco very from
these appellants . The appellants were no t at all
present at th e spot wh en the alleged ass ault and
incid ent took place. Th e appellants in Cri.Appeal
No.200131/2022 is an Ed ito r of local newsp ap er,
who was very m uch present in t he village. Though
the police alleged that h is name was men tioned on
the b asis of vo luntary statemen t of accused No .11,
that itself show s that the said statement was created
and this accu sed No.11 w as arrested on 27 .04.202 2.
11
8. It is also argued that the app ellants in
Cri.App ealNo.200135/2022 were arrested on
29.04.2022 on the b asis o f th eir alleged voluntary
sta tements and the n ame of these ap pellan ts are n ot
mentioned by the co mplainant. A ccused No s.8 and 9
also b elong to SC co mmu nity, therefore, A troc ities
Act not attrac ted against them . The only alleg ation
ag ainst these ap pellants that they shown the ho use
of CW.21/Laxman Harijan who is father in law of th e
deceas ed-Ram esh. T here is neith er any role of these
accused in con sp iracy nor in th e inciden t of murd er.
They were not present at the time of incid ent of
assau lt.
9. It is argued that the allegations ag ainst
accused No.5 does no t show that he was present at
the tim e of inciden t or he did any act. Neither h e
committed the mu rder of deceased nor there is any
alleg ations ag ainst him. T his app ellant- accus ed No.5
is implicated on the b asis of his volu ntary statem ent.
It is alleg ed th at these accused Nos.5 to 10 wen t to
Kavalag i and th rown the dead b ody of Ramesh at
12
10:30 p.m. near the house of CW.21. Th ere is no
sta tement to show that who has seen these
app ellants throw ing the dead b ody. He is also
falsely imp licated for th e offen ce punish able und er
Section 201 of Ind ian Penal Code, which is also not
mad e o ut.
10. Learned coun sel fo r the app ellants in all
the appeals arg ued that the accused No.5 is in
custody from 16.02.2022 and ac cused Nos.8 and 9
from 29.04.20 22 and accused No.11 from
27.04.2022. The inves tigation is already completed
and Ch arg e Sheet is already filed. They are having
family memb ers and th ey have movab le and
im movable properties. In view of th e material
placed before the Court learned cou nsel argu ed th at
as th ere is no material evidence to show that th ey
have com mitted offenc e punishab le with death or
imp risonme nt for life, p re-trial d etention s hall not b e
encou rag ed and they shall be released on bail. It is
further argu ed that appellants are read y and willing
to abide by any conditio ns that may be imp osed b y
13
this Court. With these arguments , learned coun sel
for the app ellants prayed to enlarge th e appellants
on b ail.
11. Ag ainst this, the learn ed High Cou rt
Government Plead er orally objected and argu ed th at
the alleg ed offences are heinous in nature. Th e
Investig ating Officer has collected materials ag ains t
these appellants. The murder of a you ng boy was
committed for p osting som e material in the face-
book. On e of the accus ed i.e., accused No.2 is a
rowdy sheeter and having nu mber of c ases ag ains t
him. The role o f these app ellants show s that th ey
have assisted th e main accused to cause
disapp earance of the d ead bod y and instig ated th e
other accused to take away th e life. Th erefore,
looking in to their role and their background, if these
app ellants are released on b ail, there is likelihood
that th ey threatening the prosecution w itnesses or
they flea a way f rom jurisdiction of th e Court or they
may tamp er the prosecution evid ence. Th erefore, the
learn ed Sessions Judge, after considering all th e
14
materials, has rightly rejected t heir b ail p etitions .
Hence, the learned Hig h Court Government Plead er
prays to d ismiss the appeals.
12. The learn ed counsel for the respo nden t
No.2 also argued that all the accused p erson s have
conspired a nd comm itted the mu rder of resp ondent
No.2's son . If th ey are released on bail, there is
likelihood of th reatening resp ond ent No.2 and oth er
witnesses and they may also ab scond . Hence, th e
learn ed counsel for the respond ent No.2 prays to
dismiss th e ap peals.
13. I have perused the entire ch arge sheet,
complaint, face-book commen t, volun tary statements
and other m aterials. The postmo rtem repo rt o f th e
deceas ed sho ws that th ere w as patterned abrasion
ho rizon tally, laceration over p osterior asp ect of rig ht
elbow, con tused abrasion o ver left d orsum aspec t
palm and etc., The death was due to shock as a
result o f injuries sustained over th e h ead and b ody.
It is also evident that th e dea d body was lying
infront of hou se of fath er-in- law of the deceased and
15
it is stated that in between 06 .00 a.m . to 10.30 a.m.
on 02 .02.2022 somebody has th rown the dead bod y
by murd ering and assaulting deceased. T he FIR w as
lod ged ag ainst th e accused No.1 and 2.
Subs equently, th e other accused were arrested and
their volun tary statem ents were record ed and
moto rcyc les and oth er veh icles are recovered. Th e
main allegation of assau lt ap pearing at this stag e is
ag ainst accused Nos.1 to 4. Th e said f ace-book
comm ent was mad e ag ainst accused No.2. It is
alleg ed that the motive for m urder is fo r the said
comm ent p ut by the dec eased in his face-book and
because of th at accused No.1 to 4 conspired
togeth er, ass aulted th e deceased, took his bod y to
housing b oard and next day morn ing in b etween
06.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m., with the h elp accu sed
No.5 to 10 th ey h ave thrown th e dead bod y in front
of a house of fath er-in-law of d eceased .
14. Admitted ly, these app ellants were no t
present, when the said alleg ed assault took place.
Even there is no alleg ation th at they have taken the
16
injured person to housing board and kept there. Th e
only allegation is that on the n ext day acc used Nos.5
to 10 were called. It is alleg ed that motorcycle of
the accu sed No.5 w as used for transporting th e
body. Th e a llegation ag ainst the accused No.1 is that
he ins tigated the accus ed No .2. Therefore, looking
into the m aterials collected ag ain st th ese appellants
and th e nature of alleg ations against th em and
sta tements of th e witness es and other m aterials, the
charg e sh eet itself dis closes th at wh at are th e
offences they have committed as stated abo ve.
15. It is settled principle of law that bail is a rule and
rejection is an exception. While granting or rejecting the bail
application, the Court will have to take into consideration,
(1) the nature and seriousness of the offence;
(2) character of the accused;
(3) circumstances which are peculiar to
accused;
(4) reasonable probabilities of presence of the
accused not being secured at trial;
(5) reasonable apprehension of witnesses
being tampered with; and
(6) larger interest of public or the state and
similar other considerations, which arise
when a court is asked to admit the
accused to bail in a non-bailable offence.
17
16. So, in the lig ht of these princip les, if the
present appeals, the o rder p ass ed b y the Sessions
Jud ge, entire c harg e sh eet materials, reports and
docum ents are con sid ered, in my considered view
these appellants h ave mad e out g rounds to grant
bail. Accused No.8 and 9 also belongs to schedule
caste. Only accused No.5 and 11 belo ngs to d ifferent
casts as p er th e charg e sheet. Th e m ain alleg ations
are ag ainst accu sed No .1 to 4. The o nly allegation
ag ainst accused No.11 is for the offence pu nishable
und er S ection 109 of IPC. The alleg ation ag ains t
accused Nos.8 and 9 for the offence punishable
und er Sectio n 201 of IPC. That are b ased on their
confession statement.
17. The investigation is already comp leted and
charg e sheet is also filed. The app ellants are not
requ ired for fu rther investig ation or interrog ation.
On th e other h and, they h ave c ontend ed that th ey
are read y to ab ide by an y con ditions and appear
before th e Court or In vestig ating Officer. Th erefore,
18
looking into the nature of allegatio ns and th e role
played by these appellants and in view of th e
materials placed before th e Court, in m y considered
view the learned Sessions Judg e has not justified in
rejecting th e b ail p etitions, simply bec ause th e
offence is p unishab le under S ection 302 of IPC is
includ ed in the ch arge sh eet.
18. The apprehension of the prosecution can be
meted out by imposing reasonable conditions on the
appellants. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The Criminal Appeals No.200131/2022, 200135/2022 and 200148/2022 filed under Section 14(A) (2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are hereby allowed.
The order passed by the II Additional Sessions Court, Vijayapura in Crl.Misc.No.609/2022 dated 08.06.2022, in Crl.Misc.705/2022 dated 29.06.2022 and in Crl.Misc.No.851/2022 dated 29.06.2022, respectively are hereby set-aside.
19The appellant - accused No.11 - Sunildatt s/o Marutirao Saraf, the appellants - accused No.8 and 9 - Sachin s/o Shivaningappa Chalawadi and Praveeen s/o Shankar Chalawadi and the appellant - accused No.5 Gurusidda s/o Appashy Doni, in Crime No.22/2022 of Vijayapur Rural Police Station, on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Vijayapura, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 302, 201 and 109 read with Section 34 of IPC along with Section 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions.
i) The appellants shall execute a self-bond for Rs.2,00,000/- each with two solvent sureties, for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or Committal Court where the case is now pending.
ii) The appellants shall not try to tamper the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii) The appellants shall not threaten the respondent No.2 or any other witnesses in any manner.
20iv) The appellants shall mark their attendance before the jurisdictional Police/SHO once in 15 days, i.e., on alternative Sunday between 10.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. till completion of the trial.
v) The appellants shall not involve in any criminal activities;
vi) The appellants shall furnish proof of their residential correct address to the investigating officer/Court and shall inform the Court/Investigating Officer if there is any change in the address.
vii) The appellants shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of Trial Court.
viii) The appellants shall appear before the Court on all dates of hearing without fail as and when directed, unless their presence is exempted.
21In case if any of the condition is violated, the prosecution is at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE sdu/KJJ