Karnataka High Court
Manoj Kumar Alias Manoj Kumar Shetty vs State By Shankaranarayana Police on 17 January, 2023
-1-
CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W
CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10998 OF 2022
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10925/2022 & 11379/2022
IN CRL.P.No.10998/2022:
BETWEEN:
SRI RAGHU @ RGAHVENDRA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
S/O ANTHAYYA SHETTY
R/O SALIGADDE, ASKI MANE
YADAMOGGE VILLAGE, HOSANGADI
POST, KUNDAPURA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI P P HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by SANDHYA S AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SHANKARANARYANA POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 560 001.
....RESPONDENT
(BY SRI H S SHANKAR, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.65/2021 OF
-2-
CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W
CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022
SHANKARANARAYANA P.S., UDUPI DISTRICT FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 120B, 302, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC ON THE
FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
UDUPI (SITTING AT KUNDAPURA) IN S.C.NO.519/2022.
IN CRL P. No.10925/2022:
BETWEEN:
MANOJ KUMAR ALIAS MANOJ KUMAR SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
S/O GOVINDA SHETTY,
R/O SALIGADDE, YEDAMOGE VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT-577 201.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY SHANKARANARAYANA
POLICE, UDUPI DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI H S SHANKAR, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.65/2021 OF
SHANKARANARAYANA P.S., UDUPI DISTRICT FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 120B, 302, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC ON THE
FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
UDUPI (SITTING AT KUNDAPURA) IN S.C.NO.513/2021.
-3-
CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W
CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022
IN CRL P No.11379/2022:
BETWEEN:
DHANUSH YADIYAL
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
S/O. T PRANESH YADIYAL
R/O TENKABAIL, YDAMOGE
VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 577 201.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI K PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY SHANKARANARAYANA
POLICE, UDUPI DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI H S SHANKAR, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.No.524/2021
(CR.NO.65/2021) OF SHANKARANARAYANA P.S., UDUPI
DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120B, 302, 504, 506 R/W
34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, UDUPI (SITTING AT KUNDAPURA).
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W
CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022
ORDER
The petitioners/accused Nos.4, 7 and 6 are before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No. 65/2021 of Shankarnarayana Police Station pending in the Court of 1st Addl.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC, Kundapura, Udupi District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 302, 109, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant - Jyothi.
2. Heard Sri P.P. Hegde, learned senior advocate in Crl.P.No.10998/2012 and learned counsel Sri. Venkatesh Somareddi, Advocate for the petitioner in Crl.P.Nos.10925/2022 and 11379/2022 and Sri. H.S.Shankar, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State. Perused the materials on record.
3. Learned senior advocate appearing in Crl.P.No.10998/2022 submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.7. In Crl.P.No.10925/2022, the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.4 and in Crl.P.No.11379/2022, the -5- CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022 petitioner is arrayed as accused No.6. They are innocent and have not committed any offences as alleged. They are falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. Accused Nos. 4, 6 and 7 were apprehended on 26.07.2022, 07.06.2021 and 27.09.2022 respectively and since then they are in judicial custody.
4. Learned counsels for the petitioners submitted that even though Sections 120B and 302 of IPC are invoked, absolutely there are no materials to make such serious allegations against the present petitioners. It is the case of the prosecution that petitioners were inmates of the car and they have not committed any offences. It is stated that accused No.1 is responsible for cause of death of the deceased, but it is accused No.3 who conspired with the other accused to eliminate the deceased. Initially, first information was registered only against accused Nos.1 to 3 and on the basis of the further statements of the witnesses, these petitioners were implicated. Even then, CW.1 has made it clear in his further statement that these petitioners have not assaulted the -6- CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022 deceased. Investigation has been completed and the charge sheet is filed. Detention of the petitioners in custody would amount to pre-trial punishment.
5. Learned counsels for the petitioners further submitted that accused No.3 has already granted bail as per the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.1355/2022 (Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.7009/2022) dated 29.08.2022. Therefore, these petitioners are also entitled to be enlarged on bail by extending the benefit of parity. The petitioners are the permanent residents of the addresses mentioned in the cause title to the petition and are ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against these petitioners for having committed the offences. These petitioners were having intention to cause the death of the deceased. As a result, they dashed against the -7- CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022 deceased and committed the offences, which are punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. Post- mortem report discloses that the deceased had sustained injuries to the head and the death was due to blunt force trauma. The mobile phone was recovered at the instance of accused No.1. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are not entitled for grant of bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
5. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following:
REASONS
6. CW.1, the wife of the deceased lodged the first information against accused Nos.1 to 3. Her further statement -8- CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022 was recorded by the investigating officer wherein she has stated that, she was present at the scene of occurrence. But specifically stated that these accused have not assaulted the deceased. Admittedly, the investigation is completed and the charge sheet is filed. It is the case made out by prosecution that accused No.1 is having motive to cause the death of the deceased. Accused No.2 was also had similar motive. Accused No.3 had conspired to eliminate the deceased. On the date of incident, accused Nos.1 and 2 along with other accused went in the car and dashed against the deceased. But no specific overtact is alleged against these petitioners. Accused No.3 was enlarged on bail as per the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court. Therefore, detention of the petitioners in custody would amount to infringement to their right to life and liberty. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions.
7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: -9-
CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022 ORDER The petitions are allowed.
The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.65/2021 of Shankaranarayana Police Station, pending in the Court of 1st Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) & JMFC, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:
a) The petitioners shall not commit similar offences.
b) The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
c) The petitioners shall appear before the Court as and when required.
If in case, the petitioners violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.
On furnishing the sureties by the petitioners, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify
- 10 -
CRL.P No. 10998/2022 C/W CRL.P.Nos.10925/2022, 11379/2022 the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioners and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioners on bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE SSD