Karnataka High Court
Sri Arun S/O Basavanni Kumbar vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 February, 2023
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
CRL.P No. 103952 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103952 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. SRI ARUN
S/O BASAVANNI KUMBAR
AGE. 20 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. INGALI VILLAGE,
TQ. HUKKERI,
DIST. BELAGAVI-580009
...PETITIONER
(BY MS. VAIBHAVI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. KISHOR SUDHAKAR SUTAR.,ADVOCATE (VIDEO CONFERENCE))
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
HUKKERI POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY
STATE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD BENCH - 590 001
...RESPONDENT
VIJAYALAKSHMI
M KANKUPPI (BY SRI.M.H. PATIL, AGA (VIDEO CONFERENCE))
Digitally signed by
VIJAYALAKSHMI M
KANKUPPI
Location: High Court of
Karnataka, Dharwad
Date: 2023.02.10 11:25:51
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
+0530
CR.P.C., SEEKING TO GRANT BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED
NO. 3 IN CONNECTION WITH THE CRIME NO. 158/2021 REGISTERED
BY HUKKERI POLICE STATION BELAGAVI DISTRICT FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 302, 201, 364 AND 120B
READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE VII
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI, SITTING
AT CHIKKODI IN C.C. NO. 34/2022.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
CRL.P No. 103952 of 2022
ORDER
This successive bail petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 under section 439 of Cr.P.C for granting bail in Crime No.158/2021 registered by the Hukkeri Police Station, Belagavi District for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 364 and 120B read with 34 of IPC now pending on the file of VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi sitting at Chikkodi in C.C.No.34/2022.
2. Heard the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits though this court rejected the bail petition on the earlier occasion on 13.6.2022 and now the petitioner is before this court with the changed circumstances and he is in custody for more than one year. The evidence is not yet commenced and it is stated that the mother of the petitioner is seriously ill and no one is there to look after, hence prayed for granting bail.
4. Per contra, learned HCGP objected the petition and contended that there is no changed circumstances for granting bail.
-3-CRL.P No. 103952 of 2022
5. Having heard the arguments and perused the record, admittedly this petition filed by the petitioner came to be rejected after the matter was committed to the court of session and dismissed on 13.6.2022. This court while disposing the bail petition of this petitioner had stated the accused No.1 being brother of the deceased contacted these petitioners accused Nos.2 and 3 for supari killers for committing murder of his brother by agreeing to pay Rs.5 lakh rupees and paid Rs.1 lakh as advance to accused No.1 and accused No.2 and 3 by giving to accused No.1 the photograph of his brother also was sent by the accused No.1 to this petitioner by mobile phone. Thereafter the accused Nos.1 and 2 enticed the deceased and took him in motor bike and committed murder after drinking alcohol and thrown the dead body in a river. The accused no.1 has gone to the police station for identifying the deceased and he has identified as his brother. Previously the case was registered against unknown persons, subsequently during the investigation the police asked accused no.1 to come to the police station for the investigation, he has mailed the accused. Therefore the police suspected accused No.1 that he might have committed the murder. After accused No.1 was arrested, he was made to confess the statement admitting that they -4- CRL.P No. 103952 of 2022 committed murder of the deceased by engaging this petitioner by engaging Rs.5 lakh.
6. Learned counsel previously argued that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and is only based upon the voluntary statement which is inadmissible. This court at para7 of the order in Crl.P.No.101575/2022 dated 13.06.2022 had passed an order in detail that admitting the confession statement made by the accused persons while he is in custody is not admissible, except for the recovery under Section 27 of Evidence Act. However, in this case, the mobile phone, weapon, blood stained cloth worn by the accused was seized at the instance of this petitioner which is admissible under section 27 of Evidence Act, under the circumstances. Death of the deceased by homicidal death is another circumstances and these accused Nos.2 and 3 also made extra judicial confession before some of the person. The CW25 after the commission of the murder and CW27 had seen the company of the deceased with the accused who was last seen with him. All these circumstances reveals the accused were involved in the commission of murder of deceased Bahubali by receiving advance of Rs.1 lakh for committing the murder as supari. -5- CRL.P No. 103952 of 2022
7. This court in detail has passed an order and also held that this petitioner is a professional killer and if he is released on bail he may come out from the jail and start business for professional killing by receiving suparis, therefore he is not entitled for bail.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, absolutely there is no changed circumstances for considering the successive bail petition of the petitioner, by this court therefore the bail petition is hereby dismissed.
However trial court is directed to dispose of the matter as early as possible within 6 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE AKV