Karnataka High Court
Kiran S/O Sanjeev Doddamani vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 July, 2018
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K.Somashekar
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100850 OF 2018
BETWEEN
KIRAN S/O SANJEEV DODDAMANI
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O :BANKAPUR CHOWK,
WALVEKAR HAKKAL,
PATIL GALLI, P.B. ROAD, HUBBALLI.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI K.M.SHIRALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HUBBALLI RURAL P.S.,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH DHARWAD. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1
ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.142/2017, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD SITTING AT
HUBBALLI REGISTERED, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 324, 307, 302, 342, 504 R/W SECTION
149 OF IPC ARISING OUT OF HUBBALLI RURAL P.S. CRIME
NO.79/2017.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
:2:
ORDER
This bail petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Hubballi Rural P.S. in Crime No.79/2017 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 307, 302, 342, 504 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Since from the date of his arrest, the petitioner is in judicial custody. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner is praying for enlargement of the petitioner on regular bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent - State.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on filing of the complaint by the complainant, a case came to be registered for the aforesaid alleged offences and thereafter, the investigation was conducted by the Investigation Officer. The allegations made in the FIR recorded by the Police, it reveals that one Parashuram Doddamani lodged a complaint before the respondent- :3: Police on 03.02.2017 alleging that on 02.02.2017 at about 9.15 p.m., on Kusugal road, Keshwapur, Hubli in front of a Mutt, accused Nos.1 to 5 surrounded him and questioned what was the affair which he was having with the sister of accused No.1. Thereafter, with a common intention to commit the offence, all accused joined together and undressed the complainant and attacked him with deadly weapons and caused injuries, as inflicted over his person, which reveals in the postmortem report said to have issued by the Doctor, who conducted autopsy. Accused Nos.2 to 5 are said to be common friends of this accused-Kiran, who is arraigned as accused in the alleged crime. There is an allegation made against this accused. But there is no specific overt act as to in which part of the head the accused said to have assaulted and that the co-accused have been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench by imposing certain conditions, as stipulated therein in Criminal Petition No.100223/2018 dated 12.02.2018. A copy of the same :4: is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the purpose of perusal.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner addressed his argument relating to the involvement of this accused and causing injuries, so also committing the murder of the deceased along with his friends, as accused Nos.2 to 5. The incident was taken place on 02.02.2017, which revealed in the complaint said to have recorded by the Police in Crime No.79/2017. This petitioner is being arraigned as accused No.1 in the alleged crime. However, Crime No.79/2017 said to have registered by the Police against the accused, as the injured was taken to the hospital and while he was under
treatment, he last his breathe. Subsequently, the Investigating Officer has investigated the case and laid charge sheet against the accused persons for the aforesaid offences. However, the accused are required to face the trial in S.C. No.142/2017 and the petitioner/accused is in judicial custody since from the date of his arrest.:5:
5. Apart from that, the other accused have already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Petition No.102327/2017 dated 05.01.2018 and also in Criminal Petition No.100223/2018 dated 12.02.2018, principle of parity be extended to this accused for considering his bail petition. Hence, on the ground of parity, this petitioner may be granted bail by allowing the petition.
6. It is further contended that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not at all committed the alleged offences and despite of it, the crime came to be registered by the respondent - Police against the petitioner just to give harassment to him and there is no direct overt act attributed against the petitioner for the alleged offences. However, the petitioner is in judicial custody since form the date of his arrest. It is further contended that the petitioner is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail to him. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail. :6:
7. Per contra, the learned HCGP for the respondent - State contended that on the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant, a case came to be registered in Crime No.79/2017 for the aforesaid alleged offences. It is further contended that as per postmortem report, there are 33 external injuries, as noticed by the Doctor during autopsy which are ante-mortem in nature.
Further the Doctor opined that the death is due to shock, as a result of soft tissue injuries sustained. Therefore, it appears that there are prima facie materials against the accused and accordingly, the learned HCGP prayed to reject the bail petition, as the petitioner does not deserve for the bail as sought for.
8. As already stated in detail, keeping in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP, on 02.02.2017 at about 9.15 p.m., on Kusugal road, Keshwapur, Hubli in front of a Mutt, accused Nos.1 to 5 surrounded him and questioned as to what he has done with the sister of accused No.1. Thereafter, they attacked him with deadly :7: weapons with a common intention to commit the offence and assaulted the deceased. As submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the co-accused have already been granted bail by imposing certain suitable conditions as stipulated therein. Whereas, on perusal of the postmortem report, it revealed that there were 33 external injuries on the deceased which were ante- mortem in nature. But there are no specific materials as to on which part of the head, the petitioner said to have assaulted the deceased and the Doctor has opined that the death was due to shock, as a result of soft tissue injuries sustained.
9. Therefore, keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, it is said that it does not require for any detailed discussion, while considering the bail petition filed by the petitioner, as there are materials as well as substances in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking for the relief of bail. Whereas, the learned HCGP submits that if the petitioner is supposed to be released :8: on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and would destroy the evidence. As this apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP, could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution.
10. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as under the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby allowed, subject to the following conditions:
(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with like sum surety to the satisfaction of the Court below in S.C. No.142/2017 arise out of C.C. No.1344/2017.
(2) The petitioner shall not tamper or
hamper the case of prosecution
witnesses.
:9:
(3) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., on first week of Sunday, as per the English monthly calendar in between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. till the conclusion of the case before the concerned SHO.
(4) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Dharwad District without prior permission from the concerned Court of law.
(5) The petitioner shall not indulge with any other criminal activities henceforth.
(6) If the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.
Sd/-
JUDGE CLK