Karnataka High Court
Raju @ Kodli Raja vs State on 31 October, 2018
Author: John Michael Cunha
Bench: John Michael Cunha
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200848/2018
BETWEEN:
RAJU @ KODLI RAJA S/O BALAPPA
HULIMANI, AGE : 25 YEARS,
OCC : MANSON, R/O TARFILE,
KALABURAGI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI B.S. NASI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE THROUGH CHOWK P.S.,
KALABURAGI, REPRESENTED
THROUGH ADDL. S.P.P.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
KALABURAGI BENCH.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAKASH YELI, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO RELEASE THE ACCUSED
NO.7/PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME
2
NO.46/2017 AND FIR NO.9/2017 REGISTERED WITH
CHOWK POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148,
341, 326, 109, 120-B, 393, 307 201 212 R/W SECTION
149 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. DIST. AND
SESSION JUDGE AT KALABURAGI.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is by accused No.7 for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., in crime No.46/2017 on the file of Chowk Police Station, Kalaburagi.
2. The investigation is completed and charge sheet is laid against 17 accused persons. The trial Court has taken cognizance of the offences against accused Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 326, 109, 120-B, 393, 307 201 R/w Section 149 of IPC and also 2 (d) (e) (f) and 3 (1)
(i) (ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act, 2000. As against accused Nos.6 to 17, cognizance is taken for the offences punishable under 3 Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 326, 109, 120-B, 393, 307 201 R/w Section 149 of IPC.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.03.2017 at about 11 a.m., when the son of the complainant and his friends namely, CWs.33 to 37 were in Shetty Complex in a juice shop, the accused persons assaulted Shrikanth with deadly weapons such as swords, daggers, sickle etc and caused fatal injuries on vital parts of his body. According to the prosecution the alleged assault was made with a view to extort money from the injured.
4. The bail application moved by the petitioner has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge mainly on the ground that the petitioner is associated with accused No.1 who is facing charges under KCOCA Act. In paragraph No.16 the learned judge has observed as under:-
"From perusal of the objections, it is clear that so many cases are pending against the 4 petitioner in various courts. Therefore, it is alleged that the petitioner involved in continuing unlawful activity either singly or jointly as member of an Organized Crime Syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate in respect of which more than one charge sheet have been filed before a competent Court within the preceding period of 10 years and that Court has taken cognizance of such offence."
5. This observation is patently incorrect and contrary to the order sheet produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner which indicates that KCOCA charges are framed only against accused Nos.1 to 5. No cognizance appears to have been taken against the present petitioner under any of the provisions of the KCOCA Act. Therefore, it is clear that the learned Session Judge has misdirected himself in rejecting the application on the purported ground that the petitioner herein has been facing charges under the KCOCA Act. 5
6. In order to ascertain the correctness of the said observation, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor was directed to furnish the details of the cases pending against the petitioner. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor has filed a memo which reads as under:-
1. Crime No.125/2015 on the file of the Station Bazar P.S. Kalaburagi for the offence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 201 R/w Section 149 of IPC, wherein the petitioner has been acquitted by an order dated 12.04.2018.
2. Crime No.20/2017 on the file of Station Bazar P.S. Kalaburagi for the offence under Section 110 (e) and (g) of Cr.P.C. which is pending before the Taluka Magistrate Kalaburagi.
7. From the above memo, it is clear that as on the date of passing order on the bail application by the trial Court, not a single case was pending against the petitioner. Under such circumstance, it was not proper for the trial Court to dismiss the application on the purported ground that the petitioner was also facing the charge under KCOCA Act. The further, observation made by the learned Sessions Judge is also equally fallacious and 6 baseless. The trial Court in page No.20 of the impugned order has observed as under :-
"The allegations against this petitioner are that, he is vagabond and unemployed and he has indulged in such criminal activities and is a member of organized crime activities and is a member of organized crime syndicate joining with the main accused No.1 Satish Reddy @ Market Satish @ Sangam Satya who is head of such crime syndicate for last 4-5 years."
8. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor has not been able to point out any material to show the involvement of the petitioner in any criminal activity of organized crime syndicate. The learned Sessions Judge ought to have been more cautious in making such reckless and baseless observations which appears to have prejudiced the mind of the learned Judge leading to the dismissal of the application 7
9. Coming to the merits of the case, undeniably the complaint was lodged by the father of the injured alleging that at about 11-30 a.m., the friend of the injured, namely Mahesh informed him that at about 11-30 a.m., accused Nos.1 to 3 and four others came in a white color swift car and assaulted his son with choppers, Talwars and clubs. In the complaint he alleged that the present petitioner Raju @ Kodli Raja, Malagatti Vikram, Nagaraj @ Spot Naga and other four accused together assaulted Shrikanth on his jaws and neck. In his statement the injured Shrikanth has stated that the petitioner herein assaulted him behind his left ear. The wound certificate indicates that the injured had sustained following injuries:-
1. CLW over occipital region.
2. CLW over left parietal, left post curicular leg.
3. CLW over right surpa orbital and right mandible leg.
4. CLW over anterior part of neck and left shoulder multiple.
5. CLW over left cheek extending till right cheek.8
6. CLW just above umbilicus and left ingiunal region.
7. Stab wound over epigastric region.
10. The investigation is already completed. The petitioner is in custody since 22.05.2017. The major offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 307 of IPC. The extortion is alleged as the motive. No money is seen to have been snatched from the victim by any of accused. No doubt, the injured has sustained multiple injuries, but according to the injured, the said injuries were inflicted by as many as seven accused persons. No specific motive is alleged against the present petitioner. No previous enmity or antecedents have been alleged against the present petitioner. Therefore, taking into consideration all the above facts, I am of the view that the custody of the petitioner cannot be extended any further solely by way of punishment.
11. Though the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition, contending that the 9 petitioner is involved in heinous offence, having regard to the above circumstance and in the absence of any material to show that the petitioner is involved in any other cases, in my view, the petition deserves to be allowed.
12. Hence, the following order:-
a) Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on obtaining a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
b) Petitioner shall appear before the court as and when required.
c) Petitioner shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses in whatsoever manner.
d) Petitioner shall not get himself involved in similar offences.10
e) The prosecution is at liberty to seek for cancellation of the bail for violation of any of the above conditions.
Sd/-
JUDGE RSP