Karnataka High Court
Shri. Suresh Irappa Badiger vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 December, 2021
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7 t h DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102242/2021
BETWEEN:
SHRI. S URES H IRA PPA BADIGER
AGE 63 YEARS , OCC COOLIE,
R/O HONNAPUR, T ALUK. KITTUR,
DIST BELA GAVI.PI N-591102
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S.M . MUCHHANDI, ADV OCAT E)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THE POLI CE INSPECTOR
KITTUR POLICE ST ATION-591115
REPRES ENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
HIGH COURT OF K ARNTAKA
AT . DHARWAD BENCH-580011
... RES PONDENT
(BY SRI. RAMESH B.CHI GARI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF
CR.P.C., SEEKING THE PETITION BE ALLOWED AN D
THE PETITIONER/ ACCUSED MAY KINDLY BE ENLARGED
ON REGULAR BAIL IN SC NO.247/ 2020 (KITTUR P.S .
CRIME NO.17/ 2020 U/S 307, 504, 354(A), 354(C) ,
354(D) IPC) ON T HE FILE OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS COURT BELAGAVI .
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The sole accused 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.17/2020 of Kittur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504 and 354A, 354C and 354D of The Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity) pending on the file of the learned V Additional District and Sessions Court, Belagavi, in SC No.247/2020.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that Smt. Basavavva, w/o Suresh Badiger, resident of Honnapur, filed a complaint against her husband-Suresh Badiger stating that she is 3 residing in Honnapur village along with her husband(petitioner), daughter-in-law-Geeta and her son-Irappa, who died leaving behind his wife-Geeta. It is further stated that her husband-Suresh Badiger, the petitioner- accused, was, always, trying to outrage the modesty of Geeta. That on 05.02.2020 at 11.30 pm when the complainant and daughter- in-law were at home, the petitioner/accused came in a drunken condition and started quarrel with Geeta asking her to sleep with him. The complainant advised him not to do like that. The petitioner/accused enraged by that, abused in filthy language and told the complainant that he will murder her and then have sex with Geeta-daughter-in-law. He picked up an axe which was nearby and assaulted the complainant and when Geeta 4 came for rescue, he assaulted her also. The complainant and Geeta started shouting and the neighbours came and shifted them to hospital and the petitioner ran away from the spot. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.17/2020 of Kittur Police Station for offences under Sections 307 and 504 of IPC. The Police, after completion of investigation, filed charge-sheet against the petitioner for offences under Sections 307, 504, 354A, 354C and 354D of IPC and same is now pending on the file of the learned V Additional District and Sessions Court, Belagavi, in SC No.247/2020. The petitioner filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.649/2021 seeking bail and the same came to be rejected by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, by order 5 dated 28.07.2021. 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. It would be the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, there was no intention on the part of the petitioner/accused to kill the injured. The injured are discharged from the hospital and there is no danger to their life. The petitioner is aged 63 years and he is a carpenter. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 13.02.2020 and as charge sheet is filed, he is not required for custodial interrogation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. With this, he prayed for allowing the petition. 6
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that, the offences alleged against the petitioner are heinous punishable with imprisonment for life. CW.1-Basavva and CW.3-Geeta, both, sustained two injuries each. Out of them, Basavva-sustained 2 grievous injuries and Geetha sustained one grievous injury. The Said Basavva-CW.1 and Geeta-CW.7 in their statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. have specifically stated regarding assault made by the petitioner/accused with an axe. CW.9 is the neighbour, who on hearing the sound, came near the spot and saw the injured and the accused holding axe. CWs.8 and 10 have taken the injured to the hospital. The axe has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner/accused. The axe is blood 7 stained as per the FSL report. Charge-sheet material shows prima facie case against the petitioner. If the petitioner is granted bail, he will threaten the injured and other prosecution witnesses. The offences alleged against the petitioners are heinous punishable for imprisonment of life. It is his further submission that, if, the petitioner is granted bail, he will tamper the prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.
6. Having regard to the submission 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 levelled against the petitioner is that he was outraging the modesty 8 of his daughter-in-law and at that time, his wife advised him and therefore enraged by that, he assaulted his wife with an axe on her face and also assaulted his daughter-in-law- Geeta, who came to rescue, with an axe on her neck and face and caused grievous injuries and attempted to commit their murder. The statements of the injured Basavva and Geeta have been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein they have specifically stated the overt act of the petitioner. Both the injuries sustained by Basavva are grievous and Geeta sustained one grievous injury out of the injuries sustained by her. Blood stained axe has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner/accused. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 13.02.2020. The petitioner is aged 65 years at present. As charge sheet is 9 filed, the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. The occupation of the petitioner is carpentary. Looking to the age of the petitioner, he is entitled for grant of bail with certain conditions. The apprehension of the prosecution is that, if the petitioner is granted bail, he will go to Honnapur village of Kittur taluk and has to reside with the injured, who are his wife and daughter-in-law and therefore he may threaten them. The said objection can be met with by imposing a condition restraining the petitioner/accused not to visit Honnapur village till disposal of the case.
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 granting bail subject to certain terms and 10 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 shall be released on bail in Crime No.17/2020 of Kittur Police Station, pending in SC No.247/2020 on the file of the learned V Additional District and Sessions Court, Belagavi, subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner/accused 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.11
ii) The petitioner/accused shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner/accused shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.
iv) The petitioner/accused shall not
enter Honnapur village of Kittur
taluk till disposal of the case
registered against him.
Sd/-
JUDGE
kmv