Karnataka High Court
Sri.Krishna @ Korangu vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 August, 2010
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE- DATED nus THE 23*" om! 05 AUGUST 2910-1' BEFORE : THE i-lON'Bi.£ MILJUSTICE; N.ANANbA' " 57.1. ' Cr|.P.NQ..§8Q4[ 291g 1 Between : Krishna @ Korangop' . Son of late Subramani' Naidug Aged 42 years; 'V ' Resident of N'o_.9Q8_, g V' 11*" A Cross, _\fy.a1ikaya_l, " " Bangalore. " C .. Petitioner ( By Sri 'Toum*y% Sebastiain',~~.:Si=iC-ounsei, ) i:<a-rnataka By"i21aVIies'hwara.m"Police Station Ba~nga_lore.« .. Respondent V «V ( Kumar Majage, HCGP ) This Criminal Petition is filed under section 439 of praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime i\£o.185/10 of Maliesiiwaram Police Station, Bangaiore City, which is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364(A), SO6(A) r/w. Section 34 of IPC. CrI.P.N . 7 2. 1 Bgtwegn : Krishna @ Korangu Son of late Subramani Aged 40 years, Resident of No.90, 11"' Cross, Vayalakaval, » ~ . : Bangalore. Pei:itio_nef.% ( By Sri Tomy Sebastian Agg : The State of iiarfiiatakiévc. , By Yelahalga Up.pa--n?a_gar;a_ Poli%:e-- Statiognwwi Ban9al0f€- it .. Respondent ( By Sri tiijay Kurn'arfjVM>a'j.a'g'e,HCGP ) _'"'l;his"i'iCriminaliyyfietition is filed under section 439 of '-.C'i-.i?>;C., -.pray«i..ng~__ to enlarge the petitioner on bail in S~.C.~islo.i1.20.[.10j~.p_ending on the file of the Fast Track (S'ess'i--o'ns)' ~'."_(-Zo'i:irt-VH1, Bangalore in Cr.No.186/O9 of Yelai~--..anl<a~~ New Town P.S., Bangalore City, which IS 'yregisteredgfor the offences punishable under Sections 143, 14,7, 14'8,__120(B), 307, 302 r/w. Section 149 of IPC. it = , These Criminal Petitions coming on for orders this day, Court made the following : ORDER
The petitioner in both the cases is common._,»~..VH-eSi~i.s arrayed as accused No.13 in Crime Yeiahanka New Town Police Station,__.w.hi__ch is"re'g.i}3teVred"for" "
the offences punishable under SeE:tioij_'scA.:V1<l'3.,"-1477,'V:"1.48::_,_c 120(3), 307, 302, 109, 201 r/w; se.;tiori'-149 The petitioner is NoV."1"in Crime No.18S/2010 of iYia|leshyyVa'i'a_nlS"."_Policg'"ggation, which is registered for theéiojffenceis Sections 364--A, 384, SO6--B oi "
2. have'he'a:rd Sebastian, learned Senior Counsel a'p.pea_rin'g_ petitioner and the learned .--vV.§3over'ri,n'lVe'nt Adii/o~cavt_e appearing for the State and I have tai<.evn«.ti1ro~ugh the investigation records. A'--.,,The.-inijestigation records reveal that, this petitioner is a»rrayed"as1'a conspirator in Crime No.186/2009. The incident A crinie occurred on 27.7.2009. The iearned Senior Counsel four; the petitioner submitted that the investigation records do rejected on 1.6.2009. He had stayed away from the process of iaw with impunity. As on the date of occurrenc~e_:inf'-tyhe instant case i.e., on 27.7.2009, petitioner was .
4. The statements of cws.34-ianci«35 i.(\ioi;«!d0V'reveal7«thVlat there was a meeting of accused 12-._.at Daba on 25.7.2009. These statejmentsyh the' name of accused No.13,-' jthe haés"fi'ied'V: the case against the petitioner onthe' statements made by reveal that after the date No.13 had provided money th'e.V:afo'resa'i'dV§accused to enabie them to absco-n€d.«'. 'The'V:.cjonfes:sian.al.statement made by the co» accused in term's»of-- Se_cti'o"n 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, '--:y872.."':'is_-not».admlilssibievduring triai. Section 25 of the indian "'iE§v'ide"r'ice"Act. "readys as under :
09 '*-..accused of any offence."
._ n:_'2'§ : Confession to police officer not A--.__to be or-oved.~ No confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person g\} .
However, there is no bar for the investigation officer to make use of confessional statement for further investi§'a.ti'o.n. The accused who had been on medical No.474/2005, shouid have surren*de--red e4so_o'nir%i1r~arte£%;, his if request for extension of bail was réjVe<itedlV was arrested on 3o.8.2oo9n,:i'n.V%%crime»sx1§.~s18':2/'zooms off Hanumanthanagar Police.' Sta&tii.o--=;l:r"s_:'* "The 'a"ccu.se.d§ by not surrendering before the HCourt"*afi;er vrrlreejection of request for extension of that he could away €.from_ V ofil ' impu nlty. Besides four cases _are'._--vp..endinq"=.a§gair:st the accused. In the circurnstanc_e's,% the_rQ-.l:.iis n"o.._':c'e'rtainty that the accused wouid make ;himAself:a».:aiI'ab|eduring trial if he is released on bail. flTl1eVrVe'fore:;fhé cannot be released .on bail. Ivniiljrilrtivinal Petition l\io.185/2010 the investigation '.record's..do.. not make out a prima facie case against the V' "..pvetitio--neri He is invoived in a heinous offence in the 4"=.___'*~l5'cor'inected Criminal Petition No.3804/2010, for the reasons 7\s. .
"'bk/ "
stated Criminal Petition No.3804/2010, the petitionerpannot be enlarged on bail.
Accordingly, both the petitions are learned trial Judge shall expedite the "a_ncl'A shall c0~0perate for expeditious dec;5i'0n"af thee.c~'a5'e'; 2 sax: