Karnataka High Court
Gambli Bai W/O. Naga Naik vs The State By Sub Inspector Of Police on 11 September, 2012
Author: Jawad Rahim
Bench: Jawad Rahim
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11103/2012
C/w.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11104/2012
In CRL.P.11103/2012:
BETWEEN:
1. NAGANAIK S/O. LATE PEERYA NAIK
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THANDA,
TQ:HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, DIST: BELLARY
2. YANKOBI S/O.LATE PEERYA NAIK
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST
AND FINANCE BUSINESS,
R/O. ANEKAL THANDA AND OPP. OLD BDO
OFFICE, TQ:HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI
DIST: BELLARY
3. MAHANTESH S/O. NAGA NAIK
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THANDA,
TQ:HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, DIST: BELLARY
4. KUMAR NAIK S/O. NAGA NAIK
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT OF
B.SC NURSHING, R/O. ANEKAL THANDA,
TQ:HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, DIST: BELLARY
:2:
5. PRAKASH NAIK S/O. NAGA NAIK
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC:IIND YEAR PUC
STUDENT IN SMIOR COLLEGE, VYASANAKERE
R/O. ANEKAL THANDA,
TQ:HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI
DIST: BELLARY
6. MANJU NAIK S/O. RAMASWAMY NAIK
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT
R/O. ANEKAL THANDA,
TQ:HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI
DIST: BELLARY
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. K L PATIL & SRI. T HANUMAREDDY ADVS.)
AND:
THE STATE BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI POLICE STATION
HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, DIST: BELLARY
R/BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH, DHARWAD
... RESPONDENT
(By Sri.V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL.SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF
CR.P.C. IT IS PRAYED THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT BE
PLEASE DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE
THE PETITIONERS BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST
IN CRIME NO.104/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE
HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI P.S. DIST. BELLARY, FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 504 & 506, 143, 302 R/W SEC.
149 OF IPC IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
:3:
In CRL.P.11104/2012:
BETWEEN:
1. GAMBLI BAI W/O. NAGA NAIK
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THANDA
TQ:HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
2. LAKSHMI BAI W/O. YANKOBI
AGE: 36 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE WIFE AND AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. OPP. OLD BDO OFFICE,
HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI
AND ANEKAL THAND,
TQ: HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
3. GEETHA BAI @ SEETHA BAI W/O. POMPA NAIK
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THAND,
TQ: HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
4. POMPA NAIK S/O.MEGYA NAIK
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THAND,
TQ: HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
5. SUBRAMANYA S/O. RAMA NAIK
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THAND,
TQ: HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
:4:
6. UMESHNAIK S/O. RAMA NAIK
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THAND,
TQ: HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
7. CHANDRA NAIK S/O. RAMA NAIK
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THAND,
TQ: HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
8. MARUTHI NAIK S/O. SEVYA NAIK
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THAND,
TQ: HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
9. RAVINDRANATH NAIK S/O. RAMA NAIK
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ANEKAL THAND,
TQ: HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST: BELLARY
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. K L PATIL AND SRI. T HANUMAREDDY ADVS.)
AND:
THE STATE BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI POLICE STATION
HAGARIBOMMAHALLI, DIST: BELLARY
R/BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH, DHARWAD
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL.SPP)
:5:
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/ 438 OF
CR.P.C. IT IS PRAYED THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT BE
PLEASE DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE
THE PETITIONERS BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST
IN CRIME NO.104/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE
HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI P.S. DIST. BELLARY, FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 504 & 506, 143, 302 R/W SEC.
149 OF IPC IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
These two petitions are by persons who are arraigned together using provisions of Section 149 of the I.P.C. for principal offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C. apart from other offences like 506, 504 of the I.P.C.
2. Heard regarding Crl.P.11103/2012 filed by Accused Nos.1 to 6.
3. Sri.K.L.Patil, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits he may be permitted to withdraw Crl.P.11103/2012 field by Accused Nos.1 to 6 to seek regular bail after they surrender before the jurisdictional court.
:6:
4. Submission is placed on record.
Crl.P.11103/2012 is dismissed as withdrawn. Reg. Crl.P.11104/2012 :-
5. Heard regarding Crl.P.11104/2012 filed by Accused Nos.7 to 16.
6. The prosecution case is one B.Veeresh S/o. Durgya Naik lodged a report against Naga Naik, Venkobi Peerya Naik, Mahantesh Peerya Naik, Kumara Naga Naik, Prakash Naga Naik, Manju Naik and others alleging that they are responsible for the death of his brother Umesh Naik.
7. In the report, he also mentioned that Umesh naik (since deceased), Venkatesh Naik and he are genetic brothers. Accused No.1/Naga Naik is the resident of Anekallu Thanda. His brother Venkatesh Naik fell in love with one Pallavi :7: daughter of Naga Naik and had married her, which had antagonized Accused No.1/Naga Naik. This also lead to enmity and they wanted to seek vengeance.
8. On 26.06.2012, his brother-in-law/Gouda Naik invited the complainant and his family members to visit Anekal Thanda to take part in some village festivity. Accepting the offer, the complainant with his brother/Umesh Naik went. As they were in the village, they saw Accused No.1/Naga Naik accompanied by Accused Nos.2 to 6 reached the place and started addressing them in filthy language and also have threatened him. The incident is alleged to have taken place in the house of Gouda Naik/brother-in-law of the complainant. Though, Gouda Naik intervened to pacify Accused No.1 and his associates, but they alleged to have warned them with dire consequences and left. Thereafter, the :8: complainant's family members asked Umesh Naik to go over to their Thanda and accordingly, he moved on a motor-cycle towards his village. That is the last they saw him. Later, only dead body was found. The complainant has not stated as to how the incident occurred except referring to statement of his sister Malabai who appears to have seen Accused Nos.1 to 6 following Umesh Naik after seeing him leaving the place on a motor cycle. That became the reason to suspect Accused Nos.1 to 6 named above and accordingly, the complainant lodged a report. He also mentioned one Rudra Naik S/o. Teja Naik was the person who informed him about the dead body of deceased Umesh Naik. The investigating officer showed Accused Nos.1 to 6 as the main offenders in the FIR and commenced investigation, during which, further statement was recorded. In the further statement, the complainant implicated Gambli Bai, Lakshmi Bai, Geetha Bai @ Seetha Bai, Po mpa :9: Naik, Subramanya Naik, Umesh Naik, Chandra Naik, Maruthi Naik and Ravindranath Naik also as the persons who are responsible for the death of Umesh Naik. Therefore, they are now arraigned as Accused Nos.7 to 15.
9. Sri K.L.Patil would submit that even against Accused Nos.1 to 6 except for the statement of Malabai, there is no statement from any witnesses or material collected to show they had indulged in the crime alleged. He would submit, the grievance if any in the mind of accused No.1 was against Venkatesh Naik who had married his sister and certainly there was no enmity with Umesh Naik. As far as, Accused Nos.2 to 6 are concerned, they are all young boys who are school going and hence, they could not have been responsible for any death.
10. Be that as it may. Their petition has been withdrawn, so we need not take into : 10 : consideration any aspects relating to the grounds against the registration of FIR.
11. As far as the petitioners are concerned, there is no dispute that first they were not named in the first report submitted by the complainant. Even during investigation, Malabai has not got them. Her statement is, six persons followed when he left the village on a motor cycle. Therefore, suspicion if any is justified against them. As far as petitioners are concerned, they are implicated based on the second statement given by the complainant. None of the accused have been interrogated till now as they have not been arrested.
12. The petitions field by the Accused Nos.1 to 6 and 7 to 15 are under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Since the petition on behalf of Accused Nos.1 to 6 has been withdrawn, we have to consider the grounds urged by the petitioners herein. : 11 :
13. Learned Addl.SPP could not point out any implicating aspect from the material so far collected against these petitioners to show that they have directly or indirectly been responsible for the death of Umesh Naik regarding whose death principal charge under Section 302 of the I.P.C. has been raised. In this view, I am satisfied that they have made out a case for grant of relief sought for.
14. Hence, the petition filed by Accused Nos.7 to 15 in Crl.P.No.11104/2012 is allowed subject to following conditions:
i. The petitioners are directed to appear before the investigating officer in-charge of investigation in Crime No.104/2012 of Hagari bommanahalli Police Station, within two weeks from now.
ii. The investigating officer may arrest the petitioners, but shall release them if they execute bond for a : 12 : sum of `50,000/- each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the said officer. iii. They shall appear before the Investigating officer to subject themselves for interrogation as and when required and shall cause no impediment and fully co-operate with the investigation.
iv. They shall not tamper the
prosecution material or prevail
upon witnesses by any means.
v. They shall not leave the sessions
jurisdiction of the Court without
prior permission.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Ct:sma/-
Rkk/-