Karnataka High Court
Sri Umesha M vs State Of Karnataka on 6 July, 2020
Author: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
Bench: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3042 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
Sri. Umesha M
S/o Mahadeva,
Aged about 32 years,
R/at No.11, Sahukarhundi Village,
Yelawala Hobli,
Mysuru Taluk & District - 571 130. .. Petitioner
( By Sri Srinivasa D.C., Advocate )
AND:
State of Karnataka
By Yelawala Police Station,
Represented by
The State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Buildings,
Bengaluru-560 001. .. Respondent
( By Sri Showri H.R., HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
Cr.No.86/2020 registered by Yelawala Police Station, Mysuru
District for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323,
504, 307, 506 R/w 34 of IPC.
Crl.P.No.3042/2020
2
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders through
Video Conference this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner is present through Video Conference.
2. Learned High Court Government Pleader who is also appearing through Video Conference takes notice for the respondent and submits his oral objection to the bail petition filed by the petitioner.
3. The petitioner/accused No.1 in Crime No.86/2020, of Yelawala Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 307, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as `IPC'), pending on the file of learned II J.M.F.C. Court, Mysuru, has filed this petition seeking his enlargement on bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Crl.P.No.3042/2020 3
4. The summary of the complaint is that on 31.5.2020, in a birthday party arranged by one Sri Deepu in his Farm house, the present petitioner/accused No.1 used abusive language referring to the aunt of the complainant. When the complainant objected to the same and stated that the said aunt has long back been deceased, still the accused continued to abuse her. Being scared, the complainant returned to home. However, on the same night at about 9.30 p.m., accused No.1, joined by his parents, went to the house of the complainant and abused them in filthy language and also assaulted them with deadly weapons which are machhu and knife. In the process, the complainant sustained injuries. The said complaint was lodged by the complainant on the next day in the afternoon, which was registered by the respondent-Police in their station Crime No.86/2020, for the offences punishable under Crl.P.No.3042/2020 4 Sections 341, 323, 324, 504, 307, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner in his argument submitted that a reading of the complaint prima facie would go to show that a false and frivolous complaint had been lodged against the accused. He submits that the very act of the alleged injured- complainant himself appearing before the police on the next day and lodging a complaint go to show that no alleged incident, much less, an assault using the alleged weapons has taken place. Otherwise, the complainant, who is alleged to be injured, would not have appeared before the police and lodged the complaint. He also submits that due to previous animosity, a false case has been lodged against the accused and his family members.
Crl.P.No.3042/20205
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader in his argument submits that a reading of the complaint would go to show that the alleged assault also involves using of weapons like machhu and a knife. Therefore, since the investigation is in progress, the accused does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.
7. A perusal of the complaint would go to show that merely because the complainant is said to have objected for the alleged abusing of his aunt by the petitioner/accused No.1 is said to have led to an alleged attack upon the complainant. Whether such an objection would lead to the accused and his family members after some time approaching the house of the complainant and assaulting him with alleged weapons is a matter of investigation, as well the trial, provided the same follows subsequently. In that circumstances, I am of the view that since the veracity of the complaint has to be fully investigated, it cannot Crl.P.No.3042/2020 6 be at this stage stated that the alleged incident appears to have taken place in the manner as narrated in the complaint. The apprehension of the prosecution that the investigation may be hampered by the accused/petitioner can be checked by imposing reasonable conditions.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER The Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused No.1 - Umesha M., son of Mahadeva, residing at No.11, Sahukarhundi Village, Yelawala Hobli, Mysuru Taluk and District, be enlarged on bail in Crime No.86/2020 of Yelawala Police Station, pending in the Court of learned II J.M.F.C. Court, Mysuru, for the offences punishable under 341, 323, 504, 307, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
i) That the petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `50,000/- with two Crl.P.No.3042/2020 7 sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the enlarging authority/Court.
ii) Petitioner shall appear before the respondent-
police on every Thursday between 9.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. and mark his attendance till the charge sheet is filed.
iii) Petitioner shall not hamper or tamper the prosecution witnesses and documents in any manner.
iv) The accused/petitioner to give in writing about the change in his address, if any, to the trial Court as and when such change occurs and obtain acknowledgement in that regard.
Sd/-
JUDGE bk/