Karnataka High Court
Yammi Nagarajappa S/O Neelappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 August, 2017
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101683 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
1. YAMMI NAGARAJAPPA S/O NEELAPPA
AGE: ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: KARADI AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ: HADAGALI, DIST: BALLARI.
2. YAMMI SHANTAPPA S/O NEELAPPA
AGE: ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: KARADI AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ: HADAGALI, DIST: BALLARI.
3. SANGAJJA S/O TIRUKAPPA
AGE: ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: KARADI AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ: HADAGALI, DIST: BALLARI.
4. TILAKA S/O SHANTAPPA
AGE: ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: KARADI AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ: HADAGALI, DIST: BALLARI.
5. MALLESH S/O YAMMI NAGARAJAPPA
AGE: ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: KARADI AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ: HADAGALI, DIST: BALLARI.
6. SUBASH S/O YAMMI SHANTAPPA
AGE: ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: KARADI AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ: HADAGALI, DIST: BALLARI.
:2:
7. SIDDAPPA S/O KANTAPPA
AGE: ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: KARADI AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ: HADAGALI, DIST: BALLARI.
8. NAVEENA S/O YAMMI NAGARAJAPPA
AGE: ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: KARADI AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ: HADAGALI, DIST: BALLARI.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.J. S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
A N D:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
S.H.O. HADAGALI POLICE STATION,
BALLARI DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE SEEKING THAT IN THE EVENT
OF PETITIOENRS ARREST IN HADAGALI POLICE STATION
BALLARI DISTRICT IN THEIR CRIME NO.64 OF 2017 FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 143, 147, 148, 307,
323, 354A, 354D, 448, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 149 IPC
THEY BE DIRECTED TO BE RELEASED ON BAIL.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
:3:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused No.1 to 8 under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent Police to release the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest of the petitioners for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 323, 354A, 354D, 448, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in respondent/Police Station Crime No.64/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the complaint averments, that one Shivanamma filed the complaint, alleging that on 30.04.2017 at about 06.30 p.m. at Ayyanahalli, while she was returning from her land, accused No.8 Naveena had abused her and when she had made a complaint about the same in her house before the family members, her brother Shivaraj made an enquiry with the accused No.1 and 2 and as such all the accused by forming an unlawful assembly and with a common object of picking quarrel with the complainant and her :4: family members by holding axe in their hand and trespassed in their house, attempted to commit the murder of her father, by assaulting with axe on his head. Accused also assaulted the complainant and her family members and outraged her modesty by dragging cloths, threatened her with life. Thereby they have committed the alleged offence. On the basis of the said complaint case came to be registered for the said offences.
3. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused No.1 to 8 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and also the other materials, so also the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge at Ballari sitting at Hospete, rejecting the bail application of the present petitioners. Looking to the contents of the bail application, it is contended by the petitioners, they are innocent and they have not committed the any alleged :5: offences and they are ready to abibe any reasonable conditions to be imposed by the Court.
5. During the Course of hearing of this petition, even the learned HCGP referring to the file made the submission that injured has been discharged from the hospital. This clearly goes to show at this stage that the life of the injured is out of danger and it is safe. Out of the alleged offences, the offence under Section 307 of the IPC, though non bailable in nature, but it is not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, they can be admitted to anticipatory bail.
6. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent Police is directed to release the petitioners/accused No.1 to 8 on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.64/2017 for the above said offences, subject to the following conditions:
:6:
i. Each petitioner has to execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-, and furnish for surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of arresting authority.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioners have to make themselves available before the I.O. for interrogation, as and when called for.
iv. Petitioners have to appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute the personal bond and the surety bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE RHR/-