Karnataka High Court
Davulappa S/O Bhimappa Gudisalamani vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 July, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G. UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200723/2022
BETWEEN:
DAVULAPPA S/O BHIMAPPA GUDISALAMANI,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O CHATTARAKI, TQ: SINDAGI,
DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: SHIVANAND V. PATTANASHETTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY ADDL SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH-585107.
(THROUGH DEVAR-HIPPARAGI P.S.,
DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101.)
... RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. MAYA T.R, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO GRANT THE REGULAR BAIL TO THE
PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 IN DEVAR-HIPPARAGI P.S. FIR
(CRIME) NO.66/2022 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.
143, 147, 341, 324, 504, 307, 114 R/W 149 OF IPC, PENDING
ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC COURT AT SINDAGI,
DIST: VIJAYAPURA.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
The petitioner-accused No.1 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.66/2022 of Devar Hipparagi Police Station, pending on the file of Civil Judge & JMFC Court, Sindagi, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 324, 504, 307, 114 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant-Ningappa.
2. Heard Sri. Shivanand.V.Pattanashetti, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Maya.T.R., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1. He has not committed any offence as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. He was apprehended on 14.05.2022 and since then, he is in judicial custody. It is alleged that the petitioner tried to 3 cause the death of the informant by assaulting with blunt end of the Axe. It is stated that the informant sustained injuries to his right hand. He is already discharged from the hospital and other co-accused are already enlarged on anticipatory bail. Hence, petitioner is also entitled for the benefit of parity with the said co-accused.
4. Learned counsel further submitted that the counter complaint was also filed by the wife of the present petitioner against the informant and others, which is registered in Crime No.68/2022 of same police station. In the said case, all the accused are already enlarged on bail. Therefore, petitioner is not required to be detained in custody for any other purpose, except to ensure his presence before the trial Court. He is not having any criminal antecedents. He is the permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause-title to the petition and is 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
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioner-accused No.1 for having committed the offence. He is the main accused, who tried to assault the informant with blunt end of the Axe. However, the informant escaped from the fatal blow and he sustained fracture to his right hand. Looking to the nature and seriousness of the offence, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
6. 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 petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following:5
REASONS
7. The allegations made against the petitioner for having committed the offence are of serious nature. It is stated that he tried to assault the informant with blunt end of the Axe, as a result of which, the informant sustained fracture to his right hand. It is not in dispute that the injured is already discharged from the hospital. It is also not in dispute that co-accused are also on bail. Further, it is stated that the wife of the present petitioner had lodged the first information against the informant and others, which is registered in Crime No.68/2022. It is also stated that the accused in the said case, have already granted anticipatory bail. It is not the contention of the prosecution that the petitioner is required to be detained in custody for any other purpose except to ensure his presence before the trial Court and to safeguard the interest of the prosecution witnesses. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader 6 that the petitioner may abscond or may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses.
8. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.66/2022 of Devar Hipparagi Police Station, 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 petitioner shall not commit similar offences.
b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.7
If in case, the petitioner 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 petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner 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 petitioner on bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE SMJ