Karnataka High Court
Rudrappa Bhovi And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 March, 2017
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.200292/2017
Between:
1. Rudrappa Bhovi
Age: 50 years, Occ: Agriculture
2. Babamma W/o Rudrappa Bhovi
Age: 55 years, Occ: House hold
3. Lakshmi D/o Rudrappa Bhovi
Age: 24 years
4. Parvathi D/o Rudrappa Bhovi
Age: 22 years
All are R/o Kallapur Village,
Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur
... Petitioners
(By Smt. Ambika Chowdapur, Advocate &
Sri Ishwar Raj S. Chowdapurkar, Advocate)
And:
The State of Karnataka
(Through SHO Lingasugur P.S)
Represented by Addl.
State Public Prosecutor High Court of
Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench
... Respondent
(By Sri P.S. Patil, HCGP)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. praying to direct the respondent Police to release the
petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in crime
No.13/2017 of Lingasugur P.S. which is registered for the
offences P/U/Sec. 143, 147, 504, 148, 323, 324, 326, 307
R/W 149 of IPC.
This petition is coming on for Orders this day, the
Court made the following:-
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused Nos.1, 4, 5 and 6 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.13/2017 of Lingasugur Police Station, Raichur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 504, 148, 323, 324, 326, 307 r/w 149 of IPC.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, complainant and accused persons are neighbourers. Accused persons used to talk about the character of the complainant's wife. In that 3 background, on 09.01.2017 at about 8:00 a.m. complainant, his brother-in-law went to the house of the accused so as to question the accused, what they have seen and why they are talking about the character of his wife. When they went, accused persons by constituting unlawful assembly abused in filthy language, thereafter they assaulted with rod, axe with an intention to take away the life of the complainant, caused the bleeding injuries and thereafter they also threatened to their lives. On the basis of the complaint, a case was registered against the accused persons.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State.
4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners are that petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case and they are apprehending arrest, as the police are 4 visiting frequently the house of the accused. She has also contended that because of the earlier animosity, the complainant has falsely implicated the accused- petitioners in this case. She has also contended that already accused Nos.2 and 3 have been released on bail and the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. She has also contended that the injured persons have already been discharged from the hospital and they are out of danger. As such, petitioners also entitled to be enlarged on bail. On these grounds, she prays for allowing the petition.
5. On the contrary, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State vehemently contended that when the complainant and his brother-in-law came, accused-petitioners by constituting unlawful assembly have assaulted and threatened their lives and they have also caused grievous injuries so as to take away the life of the 5 complainant. He has further contended that accused- petitioners are highly influenceable persons, at this juncture, if the petitioners are released on bail, there is likelihood of they being absconded and they may not be available for the trial and investigation is still pending. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
6. I have perused the FIR, complaint and other materials produced along with the petition and also the grounds urged in the bail petition. On going through the contents of the complaint and other materials it discloses that there was some animosity between the complainant and the accused persons and even the accused persons used to tease and talk about the character of the wife of the complainant. Be that as it may the records disclose that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Even both counsels submitted that the injured have been discharged from the hospital and are out of 6 danger. When there are no serious allegations against accused-petitioners, they are ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties, I feel if the accused-petitioners are released on bail, by imposing stringent conditions, it would meet the ends of justice.
For the aforementioned reasons, the petition is allowed.
The respondent-Police are hereby directed to release the petitioner/accused Nos.1, 4, 5 and 6 on bail, in the event of their arrest, for the above said offences, subject to the following conditions :-
i. The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) each with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.7
ii. The petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii. The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required and co-operate for investigation.
iv. The petitioners shall mark their
attendance before the Investigating
Officer once in fortnight;
v. The petitioners shall appear before the
jurisdictional Court and execute personal bonds, surety bonds and furnish sureties within thirty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE sdu