Karnataka High Court
Kalesha R Alias Vaddara Kalappa Alias ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 September, 2022
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102134 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
KALESHA R @ VADDARA KALAPPA
@ RATTIHALLI KALESH,
S/O. ANJINAPPA
AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. MAISON,
R/O. HOSALLI VILLAGE,
TALUKA HADAGALI,
DIST. VIJAYNAGAR-583219
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRINIVAS B NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH,
THROUGH HADAGALI POLICE STATION,
DIST. VIJAYANAGAR -580011
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V. MOGALI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO THE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED IN SC NO.5073/2021 ON THE FILE OF
III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, BALLARI,
-2-
CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022
SITTING AT HOSAPETE, (CRIME NO.07/2021 OF HADAGALI
POLICE STATION) REGISTER FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
U/S 302 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS TH IS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The sole accused has filed this petition under section 439 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking bail in Crime No.7/2021 of Hadagali Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity).
2. The case of the prosecution is that, one Mallappa has filed the complaint stating that he and his brother are staying separately and his father and mother are staying with his sister -3- CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022 deceased-Susheelamma. It is further stated that the petitioner was familiar to his father, mother and his sister, he was moving freely with his sister and managing the family affairs of his sister. Recently, the complainant heard about petitioner threatening his sister on some issue. The petitioner had borrowed huge money from his sister, and she was insisting him to return back the said money and in this regard his sister was irritated with the petitioner's attitude. It is further stated that on 08.01.2021 at about 1.00 p.m., complainant was informed by his wife that the petitioner has attacked his father and sister with sharp weapon and his father and sister were admitted to hospital at Hadagli. Immediately, he and others rushed to hospital and at that time both his father and sister has succumbed to the injuries. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.7/2021 of Hadagli Police Station for -4- CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022 the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. The petitioner came to be arrested on 09.01.2021. During the investigation it revealed that the petitioner was having illicit relationship with the deceased-Susheelamma and there was money transaction between them, further on 08.01.2021 the deceased had been to Hadagli to engage the Advocate in civil matter and after finishing the work while returning back from Hadagli, the petitioner took both the deceased on motorcycle to remote place and committed the murder. The charge sheet came to be filed for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. The petitioner filed Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5353/2022 seeking bail and the same came to be rejected by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ballari sitting at Hosapete by order dated 24.06.2022. Therefore, petitioner/accused is before this Court seeking bail.
-5-CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022
3. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. It would be the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that alleged motive is that the deceased-Susheelamma demanded repayment of money borrowed by the petitioner, there is no evidence in that regard. It is his further submission that there are no eyewitnesses to the incident and the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. Even though, CWs-23 to 27 have been cited as eyewitnesses to the incident, but none of them have seen the incident. The video clip has been received to the mobile phone of the complainant and it is retrieved under Mahazar by the Investigating Officer. It is his further submission that the knife has been seized from the spot and the clothes which the -6- CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022 accused was wearing at the time of offence were examined and they were not blood stained. It is his further submission that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.01.2021 and as the charge sheet is filed, the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that the motive has been stated by the complainant in his complaint, the spot has been showed by the accused and Mahazar has been drawn and also a knife has been seized from the spot. CW.23- Manjappa is the witness who has last seen this petitioner and both the deceased going on his motorcycle and after ten minutes, the petitioner alone returning on his motorcycle. CWs-23 to 27 have stated regarding dying declaration made by -7- CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022 both the deceased before them. The doctor who conducted post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased-Susheelamma has noted three injuries and opined that death is due to hemorrhage and shock as a result of stab injuries sustained. The doctor who conducted post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased- Shankrappa has noted two stab injuries and opined that death is due to hemorrhagic shock consequent upon stab injury sustained to abdomen. The knife seized under Mahazar has been sent to both Medical Officers who have conducted post mortem examination over the dead bodies of Susheelamma and Shankrappa, opined that the said knife can cause injuries noted in the post mortem report. It is his further submission that the charge sheet material shows prima facie case for the offence alleged against the petitioner. The case involves double murder. If the petitioner is granted bail, -8- CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022 there are chances of threatening the complainant and other prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.
6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the charge sheet records and the impugned order.
7. The accusation against this petitioner is that he is having illicit relationship with the deceased-Susheelamma and he was residing with her brother and father-Shankrappa. The petitioner had borrowed money from the deceased- Susheelamma and she was insisting him for repayment of said money. The petitioner took both the deceased on his motorcycle when they are returning from the Court after meeting lawyer and -9- CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022 on the way he assaulted both of them with knife and caused severe injuries and both died in the hospital on the same day. There are no eyewitnesses to the incident and the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. CW-23 is the witness who has last seen this petitioner/accused along with both the deceased on his motorcycle going on the road and after ten minutes he saw that the petitioner coming alone and he heard crying sound and went there and saw the lady and old man injured and on enquiry they told before him that they were assaulted by one Kalesha (accused) of Hosalli village, when Susheelamma demanded him repayment of money borrowed. Some unknown persons have also recorded the said statement of the deceased in video in his mobile phone. The said alleged video clip was received by the complainant to his mobile phone and the Investigating Officer has retrieved
- 10 -
CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022 the said video clip under Mahazar which contained the conversation wherein the deceased- Susheelmma has stated that this petitioner assaulted her and she is the resident of Magala Village. CWs-24 to 27 are the persons who also went near both the injured and before them also the deceased have made statement regarding petitioner causing injuries to them. Wherein, the petitioner is named as the person who caused the injuries with knife to them. The said statement of both the deceased amounts to dying declaration. The doctor who conducted post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased- Susheelamma has noted three stab injuries and opined that death is due to hemorrhage and shock as a result of stab injuries sustained. The doctor who conducted post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased-Shankrappa has noted two stab injuries and opined that death is due to
- 11 -
CRL.P No. 102134 of 2022 hemorrhagic shock consequent upon stab injury sustained to abdomen. The knife seized from the spot was examined both the Medical Officers who conducted post mortem examination over the dead body of both the deceased have opined that the said knife can cause injuries found on the bodies of both the deceased. The case involves double murder. The charge sheet material shows prima facie case against the petitioner/accused for the offence alleged against him. If the petitioner is granted bail, there are chances of threatening the complainant and other prosecution witnesses. The petitioner/accused has not made out any grounds for grant of bail. Hence, the petition is dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE SMM