Karnataka High Court
Ramakrishna @ Rama @ Kotirama vs State Of Karnataka on 24 August, 2020
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2020
BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL PETITION No.634/2020
BETWEEN:
Ramakrishna @ Rama
@ Kotirama
S/o Narayana
Aged about 20 years
Residing at Vivekanandanagara
2nd Street, Kanakapura Town
Ramanagara District
Pin Code - 571 511
... Petitioner
(By Sri. Partha Sarathy.M, Advocate)
AND:
1. State of Karnataka
By Kanakapura Town Police Station
Represented by
State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Bengaluru - 560 001.
2. Smt. Girijamma
W/o R.T.Rajagopal
Aged about 40 years
Residing at Behind Girish
Kalyan Mantap, Nirvaneshwara
Nagar
Permanent address
P.Rampura Village
Kasaba Hobli
Kanakapura Taluk.
... Respondents
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP for R1,
Sri Naveen Kumar.S, Advocate for R2 (absent)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed U/S 439 of Cr.P.C., praying
that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner
on bail in the Cr.No.163/2018 of Kanakapura Town P.S.,
Ramanagaram for the offences P/U/S 302, 120-B, 114 r/w Sec.
34 of IPC and Sec.3 (2) (V-a) of SC/ST Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, through
video conference at Principal Bench, Bengaluru, this day, the
court made the following:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 is not present.
2. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 in the charge sheet filed by the Police in connection with Crime No.163/2018 of Kanakapura Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B, 114 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(V-a) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.
3. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on account of previous enmity on 12.11.2018 at about 6.45 p.m when deceased R.T.Rajagopal was talking over his phone, accused Nos.1 to 3, with an intention to commit his 3 murder and at the instance of accused No.3, accused No.1 who was holding a chopper and accused No.2 who was holding a knife attacked the deceased and accused No.1 assaulted him on his head, face, neck etc., and accused No.2 stabbed him on his chest and committed murder.
4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there are no eye witnesses to the incident. The material collected by the prosecution is not sufficient to connect the petitioner with the crime. Apart from the sweater, there is no other recovery made at his instance. Investigation has been completed and charge sheet is filed. The Petitioner is in custody from 17.12.2018 and he is not required for any further investigation. Petitioner hails from a very respectable agriculturist family and he is ready to abide by the conditions, which may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to allow the petition.
5. Per Contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader contends that on account of previous enmity, accused Nos.1 to 3 conspired to do away with the life of 4 deceased and in furtherance of their conspiracy, accused Nos.1 and 2 have assaulted the deceased with deadly weapons and committed his murder. He submits that petitioner is involved in another crime, which is registered in Crime No.158/2017 in the very same police station and now the said case is pending trial. The learned HCGP submits that in the event of release of the petitioner, he will threaten the prosecution witnesses and hamper the case of prosecution. Accordingly, he seeks to reject the petition.
6. The incident has occurred between 6.45 p.m and 7.15 p.m on 12/11/2017 near Muslim Block, Kanakapura Town. Perusal of the Post Mortem report go to show that deceased died of due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of injuries sustained. The deceased has suffered incised wounds on the occipital and on the vertex and other parts of the body. He has suffered as many as 9 injuries. Perusal of the statement of the witnesses goes to show that from the CCTV footage, the role of the petitioner came to light. CW.28-Sri.Ravi a police constable has identified this petitioner as one of the assailant after 5 watching the CCTV footage and he has identified as an accused in Crime No.158/2017, registered in Kanakapura Police Station for the offences Punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307 r/w 149 of IPC. In the said case, the petitioner was enlarged on bail. The said case is still pending trial. When the trial was pending against him in the said case, the petitioner has again involved in the present crime after he was released on bail. In the present case, after his arrest, a blood stained sweater has been recovered, which he was wearing at the time of committing the crime. In the facts and circumstances, he is not entitled to be released on bail. Hence, the following ORDER Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE HB/-