Karnataka High Court
Shri. Fakirappa S/O Channappa Kari ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 December, 2021
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14 T H DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102292/2021
BETWEEN:
SHRI. FAKIRAPPA
S/O. CHANNAPPA KARI ALIAS VARIMANI
AGE: 31 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURIST AND SHEPHERD
R/O. BETASUR, TAL. SAUNDATTI,
DIST. BELAGAVI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAGARATHNA S. PATTAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE PSI SAUNDATTI,
R/B STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BENCH, DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAMESH B. CHIGARI, HCGP)
---
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON
BAIL IN SOUNDATTI P.S. CRIME NO.66/2021 FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 498A, 302, 114 R/W. SECTION 34
OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI.
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Accused No.1 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.66/2021 of Soundatti Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302 and 114 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity).
2. The case of the prosecution is that, one Smt. Kamalawwa, mother of the deceased Deepa, has filed a complaint stating that her daughter deceased Deepa was given in marriage to the petitioner/accused No.1 in the year 2013 and after marriage, the 3 petitioner/accused No.1 went to her matrimonial house to lead her marital life; but her husband petitioner/accused No.1 used to ill-treat her and Deepa went on tolerating the same. Out of the said wedlock, one male child was born. Two years back, when Deepa returned back to her marital home after delivery, at that time, the petitioner picked up quarrel with her and went to graze sheep by leaving her alone. At that time, Deepa constructed a shed and started residing there along with her son. Around 6 to 7 months back, since elder brother of Fakirappa by name Vitthal expired, his wife Ratnawwa started demanding her share in the property and so also deceased Deepa demanded her share, for which elders told her to call her husband. At that time, the petitioner came to Betsur 4 village, wherein the elders asked them to stay together and allotted one acre of land to the petitioner. At that time, both petitioner and his wife deceased Deepa put up sheds and started staying together. The complainant gave Rs.80,000/- to the petitioner and he had bought one motorcycle, but still he used to demand money from her from time to time. Around 15 days back, the petitioner picked up quarrel and started to beat Deepa and the complainant, for which the elders advised him to behave properly and returned back to their house. On 02.03.2021, while the complainant was in town, around 3 pm, one of her relative Mallappa Basappa Kuri made a phone call from Betsur village and informed that Fakirappa had latched the door and gone and while he and others opened the latch, they found that Deepa 5 had fallen down near the door and blood was oozing from her head. When the complainant rushed to the spot, it was 8.30 pm and she found the dead body of deceased Deepa in the shed. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.66/2021 of Soundatti Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302 and 114 read with Section 34 of the IPC, against the petitioner/accused No.1, his parents and his brother. The petitioner came to be arrested on 04.03.2021 and is remanded to judicial custody. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed only against the petitioner/accused No.1 for the offences under Sections 498A and 302 of the IPC.
The petitioner filed Crl.Misc.No.648/2021 seeking bail and the same came to be rejected 6 by the V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, by order dated 23.07.2021. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking bail.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent, has not committed any offence as alleged and he has been falsely implicated in the case. There are no eyewitnesses to the incident. The case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. There is no recovery at the instance of the petitioner and there is no evidence to connect the petitioner to the alleged crime. 7 The stone said to have been used has been found on the spot. It is her further submission that the petitioner was staying separately since last six months prior to the death of deceased Deepa. The petitioner is a shepherd and he used to go for grazing the sheep months together. There was no conjugal relationship between the petitioner and the deceased. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. With this she prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader contended that the offences alleged against the petitioner are heinous offences punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The death has taken place in the house of the petitioner. The neighbors CW15 and CW17 have heard the 8 sound of quarrel on the date of incident at 1.00 pm and subsequently found the dead body inside the house of the petitioner. The blood stained clothes have been recovered at the instance of the petitioner from his house under mahazer. The doctor, who conducted post- mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased has opined that the death is due to cardio-respiratory arrest secondary to injury to brain due to fracture of the parietal bone. As the death has taken place in the house of the petitioner, it is for the petitioner to explain the circumstances under which the death of his wife has taken place. The charge sheet material show prima facie case against the petitioner for the offence alleged against him. It is his further submission that, if the petitioner is granted bail, he will tamper the 9 prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the charge sheet records.
7. The accusation leveled against the petitioner is that, he was harassing his wife deceased Deepa suspecting her fidelity. It is further alleged that, on the date of the incident, he quarreled with the deceased Deepa and assaulted her with stone on her head and killed her. The dead body of the deceased Deepa was found inside the shed wherein the deceased and the petitioner were residing together and it was latched. When CWs. 15 10 and CW17 entered the house by opening the latch, they found the dead body of the deceased Deepa. There are no eyewitnesses to the incident and case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. As the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has to prove each of the circumstances in the trial. As the charge sheet is filed, the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. The main objection of the prosecution is that, if the petitioner is granted bail, he will tamper the prosecution witnesses. The said objection may be met with by imposing stringent conditions.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for 11 granting bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.1 shall be released on bail in Crime No.66/2021 of Soundatti Police Station subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses. 12
iii) The petitioner shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE gab