Karnataka High Court
Mr. Sujay Sulyan, vs State By Kota Police Station, on 8 July, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KAR 1340
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K. Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2072 OF 2020
BETWEEN
1. MR. SUJAY SULYAN,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
S/O MANJUNATH,
RESIDING AT SUJAY NILAYA,
CHIKKANAKERE,
MANNURU VILLAGE,
KOTA POST, BRAMHAVARA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT-576 221.
2. MAHESH KUMAR @ MAHESH GANI,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O KRISHNA GANIGA,
RESIDING AT "BHARATHI NILAYA",
No.14-3, SALMARA,
KODAVURU VILLAGE,
UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT-576 216.
3. RAVI @ RAVICHANDRA POOJARI,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
S/O KRISHNAPPA POOJARI,
RESIDING AT 6TH CROSS,
BOBBARYA KATTE,
LAKSHMINAGAR,
KODAVURU POST,
TENKANIDIYURU VILLAGE,
UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRIC-576 101.
4. ABHISHEK PALAN,
2
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
S/O UDAY PALAN,
RESIDING AT OPPOSITE TO
ST. PAUL CHURCH,
SUBRAMANYANAGAR,
PUTTUR VILLAGE,
UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT-571 201.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAJ PRABHU S., & ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATES)
AND
THE STATE BY
KOTA POLICE STATION, KOTA,
BRAHMAVARA CIRCLE,
UDUPI DISTRICT-576 221,
REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560 001.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.S.ABHIJITH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN CR.No.15 of 2019
REGISTERED BY KOTA POLICE STATION, UDUPI FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120(B), 143, 147,
148, 449, 342, 504, 323, 324, 506, 307, 302, 212 AND 201
READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') for granting regular bail.
3
2. The petitioners are accused Nos.4 to 7 in Crime No.15/2019 registered by the Kota Police Station, Udupi for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 449, 323, 307, 302, 120B, 109, 342, 504, 324, 506, 201, 212 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') on the complaint of Lohith Poojari. It is alleged by the complainant that there was some dispute with regard to the digging of mud for the purpose of constructing a lavatory near the land of complainant by accused No.1-Rajashekar Reddy. There were some verbal altercation between the complainant and the said accused No.1. Accused No.1 had shown his audacity to the complainant stating that the complainant can do whatever he want. In this background, it is further alleged by the complainant that on 26.01.2019 at about 10.15 p.m., when the complainant was proceeding on his Scooty along with his brother-Rakshith Poojary towards his house and when he reached near Kota Iyengar Bakery, he observed a Maruti Swift Car and a motor cycle following them. When 4 the complainant reached his house along with his brother and parked his vehicle near his house, he observed a person coming on the motor cycle behind them was Sujaya Sulyan - petitioner No.1 herein who is his neighbour. After sometime, the Swift Car which followed the complainant was parked on the road opposite to his house and two persons were sitting in the said car and two others were sitting on two motor-bikes and were making huge sound by raising the engines of the vehicles and by horning. On the same day, the complainant along with his friends Bharath, Yathisha, Umesha, Nagaraja, Manisha, Prasada and Shashi came to his house and when the complainant came out of his house and narrating the entire incident to his friend Bharath, at that time accused Nos.1 and 2 along with four other persons came with Swords and choppers and assaulted Bharath on his neck, head and also on his hands. When the complainant and Yathish were trying to rescue Bharath, the accused also assaulted them and other witnesses. Due to screaming of the complainant and others, the public started coming to 5 the spot and on seeing them, the accused persons ran away from the said spot. Bharath and Yathish were died while shifting to the hospital and the complainant also sustained injuries along with other witnesses. On the basis of the complaint, the Police have registered the case, arrested these petitioners and also other accused. After the investigation, the charge-sheet came to be filed. The petitioners are said to be in judicial custody from February- 2019. They moved a bail application before the Sessions Judge which came to be dismissed. Hence, they have filed this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the petitioners are innocent for the alleged offences. The entire allegations were made against accused Nos.1 to 3, but not against these petitioners. The role of the petitioners in the crime on par with accused No.8 who was already granted bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.7077/2019. Therefore, on the ground of parity, these petitioners are entitled for bail. The petitioners are 6 in judicial custody nearly for 1½ years. The names of the petitioner Nos.2 to 4 were not mentioned in the FIR. The Petitioner No.1 is a student. Investigation has already completed and charge-sheet has already been filed. Their presence is no more required. Therefore, prayed for grating bail.
4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State has seriously objected the bail petition and contended that on the previous enmity between the complainant and the accused with regard to the construction of lavatory by the accused near the well of the complainant. These accused persons formed unlawful assembly, came with the deadly weapons by following the complainant and assaulted. Thereby, they murdered two persons i.e., Bharath and Yathish. They also assaulted the complainant and caused injuries. The accused also assaulted other two persons and they are also eye-witnesses. Talwar and iron rods were recovered from accused Nos. 5 to 7 on their voluntary statements. 7 The accused have participated in committing double murder and also they attempted to commit murder of the complainant. There is sufficient material to show that they have committed the offence which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. If the accused are released on bail, they are likely to commit similar offence and tampering with the prosecution witnesses is not ruled out. The ground of parity is not available to these petitioners. Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition.
5. Upon hearing the arguments and perused the records, the accused Nos.1 to 3 along with these petitioners attacked Bharath with deadly weapons and when Yathish tried to prevent along with the complainant, the accused also assaulted the said Yathish and caused murder of two persons i.e., Bharath and Yathish. These petitioners were actively participated in the commission of murder of Bharath and Yathish. Petitioner No.1-Sujaya Sulyan also assaulted with Talwar and the other three petitioners used iron rods in the commission of murder of 8 two persons and also caused injury to the complainant- Lohith Poojary and also other two injured persons namely Shashikumara and Sachin. The statement of the injured eye-witnesses shows the actual participation of these petitioners in commission of murder of two persons and also causing injuries to the complainant and other two injured persons. The police have recovered Talwar and iron rods from the petitioner Nos.2 to 4 on their voluntary statement. The offence is heinous in nature and punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There are sufficient materials placed on record by the Investigating Officer in the charge-sheet to show the involvement of these petitioners in the crime. Co-accused No.8 has been granted bail by this Court only on the ground that his name was not found in the FIR and also in the statement of eye-witnesses. The overt act alleged against accused No.8 cannot be compared with these petitioners. The Investigating Officer has conducted Test Identification Parade and the eye-witnesses have also identified the accused petitioners. If the petitioners are granted bail, 9 there is every possibility of tampering with the prosecution witness and committing similar offences are not ruled out. They have committed double murder and also attempted to commit murder of the complainant. The offence is heinous in nature and punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Therefore, these petitioners are not entitled for bail. The parity ground cannot be extended to petitioner No.1. That apart, he has not produced any document to show that he is a student. The father of petitioner No.2 is said to be retired policeman. Therefore, if bail is granted to the petitioners, the chances of tampering the witnesses are not ruled out. I do not find any merits in the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners to exercise the discretionary power to grant bail to the accused petitioners.
Hence, Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE GBB