Karnataka High Court
Sharnappa S/O Annaraya Pujari And Anr vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 May, 2023
-1-
CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MAY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200479 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SHARNAPPA S/O ANNARAYA PUJARI
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC HOTEL BUSINESS,
R/O VARADHA NAGAR, KALABURAGI,
TQ AND DIST KALABURAGI 585110
2. KEDARLING @ KEDARNATH
S/O SHARANAPPA PUJARI
AGED ABOUT. 19 YEARS, OCC.STUDENT,
R/O VARADHA NAGAR, KALABURAGI
Digitally
signed by TQ AND DIST KALABURAGI 585 110
SACHIN
Location:
High ...PETITIONERS
Court of
Karnataka (BY SRI ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION,
KALABURAGI
REPT BY ITS ADDL SPP,
-2-
CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023
HIGH COURT BENCH,
KALABURAGI 585102
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
438 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND
FURTHER DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE
ASHOKNAGAR PS TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS/
ACCUSED, ON BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN
CRIME NO.32/2023., REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 324, 307, 114, 504,
506, R/W. SECTION 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF
V ADDL. CJ (J.D) AND JMFC, GULBARGA REGISTERED BY
THE ASHOKNAGAR POLICE STATION KALABURAGI.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., to grant anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.32/2023 registered by Ashoknagar Police Station, Kalaburagi, for the offences -3- CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023 punishable under Sections 341, 324, 307, 114, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. It is stated by the petitioners that they are innocent and they have not committed any offence and that they have been falsely implicated in the case. It is further stated that, on account of same incident, daughter of petitioner No.1 has also filed a counter case against the complainant for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 354 of IPC being registered by the Station Bazaar Police Station, Kalaburagi, in Crime No.54/2023. It is stated that, the motive for the crime is result of one sided love and marriage proposal of complainant with daughter of petitioner No.1. The complainant in order to marry the daughter of petitioner No.1 by hook or crook has lodged a false complaint against the petitioners. It is complainant who proceeded to the house of petitioner No.1 to have conversation of marriage with his daughter despite the fact that his several proposals of marriage are turndown by petitioner No.1 and his daughter. The overt-act alleged -4- CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023 against each of the petitioners can be established only after full-fledge trial. There was no intention to commit any crime by the petitioners. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is further stated that, the petitioners are the only bread earners in the family and they do not have any criminal antecedents. The petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. Hence, for these reasons, they prayed for granting anticipatory bail.
4. This bail petition is resisted by the learned HCGP by filing a detailed objection statement. In addition to that, he contended that, if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail they may tamper the prosecution evidence. The complainant has sustained grievous injury on his head because of assault by the accused persons with an iron rod and there is threat of murder to the complainant by the petitioners. He submits that no grounds are made out by the petitioners to grant -5- CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023 anticipatory bail as prayed. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.
5. Having heard the arguments of both the sides, it is seen that, the complainant filed a complaint before the respondent Police alleging that, he is resident of address stated in the complaint; to his parents there are two sons and one daughter; his sister is married and residing at Yadgiri; his brother is also married and residing in Karatgi. Complainant is unmarried and he and his mother are residing in Kalaburagi. Complainant used to visit his friends at Varada Nagar and sit at Tea Shop in Varada Nagar. At that time he came in contact with daughter of the owner of Tea Shop who is petitioner No.1 herein. He requested petitioner No.1 to arrange for his marriage with his daughter - Kenchanmma, but his request did not materialize. It is alleged in the complaint that, on 27.03.2023 at 10:30 p.m., complainant went to meet Kenchamma, but she refused to talk with him. Thereafter, while the complainant was returning via -6- CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023 Udnoor Road near Jayateerth Kalyan Mantap, at that time these petitioners came and restrained the complainant and abused him in filthy language and assaulted him by using iron road on his head. Complainant sustained bleeding injuries; petitioners gave life threat to the complainant and again one more blow was given on the head of the complainant by the petitioners. When complainant raised hue and cry public gathered there, at that time petitioners ran away from the said place. With these allegations complaint came to be filed.
6. As per the say of petitioners, they have been falsely implicated in the case. Even counter case has been filed by daughter of petitioner No.1 against the complainant for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 354 of IPC. It is stated that, now the police, based upon the compliant are making hectic attempts to arrest the petitioners. Therefore, petitioners pray for granting anticipatory bail.
-7-CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023
7. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the complainant is already discharged from the hospital. There is no life threat to the complainant. In support of his submission he relied upon the observations made in Crl. Misc. No.611/2023 by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in his order dated 21.04.2023, wherein in Para No.16 it is recited that "as per Discharge Summary, the victim has been discharged from the hospital". Since, the said order has been passed on 21.04.2023, the victim must have been discharged and there is no life threat to him.
8. No assertion is made that, complainant is still under treatment and his life is in danger.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia and others vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 S.C.C. 565 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down factors and -8- CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023 parameters that need to be taken into consideration while dealing with anticipatory bail, which are as follows :-
"Interpretation of statutes - Beneficent construction of provisions relating to personal liberty, held :
An anticipatory bail is pre-arrest legal process which directs that if the person in whose favour it is issued is thereafter arrested on the accusation in respect of which the direction is issued, he shall be released on bail. The distinction between an ordinary order of bail and an order of anticipatory bail is that whereas the former is granted after arrest and therefore means release from the custody of the police, the latter is granted in anticipation of arrest and is therefore, effective at the very moment of arrest. A direction under Section 438 is therefore intended to confer conditional immunity from the 'touch' or confinement contemplated by Section 46 of the Code. (Para 7).
In order to meet the challenge of Article 21 of the Constitution, the procedure established by law for depriving a person of is liberty must be fair, jut and reasonable. Section 438 is a procedural provision which is concerned with the -9- CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023 personal liberty of the individual who is entitled to the benefit of the presumption of innocence since he is not, on the date of his application for anticipatory bail, convicted of the offence in respect of which he seeks bail.
Since denial of bail amounts of deprivation of personal liberty, the court should lean against the imposition of unnecessary restrictions on the scope of Section 438, especially when not imposed by the legislature. An over-generous infusion of constraints and conditions which are not to be found in Section 438 can made its provisions constitutionally vulnerable since the right to personal freedom cannot be made to depend on compliance with unreasonable restrictions. The beneficent provision contained in Section 438 must be saved, not jettisoned."
10. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu case (1978) 1 S.C.C. 240, Hon'ble Justice V.R.Krishna Iyer has held as under -
"The issue of bail is one of liberty, justice, public safety and burden of the public treasury, al of which insist that a
- 10 -CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023
developed jurisprudence of bail is integral to a socially sensitized juridical process".
11. If conditions are imposed, it would satisfy the objections statement of the prosecution and would meet the ends of justice. Hence, the following:
ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., is allowed.
In the event of their arrest in Crime No.32/2023 registered by the respondent Police Station, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:
1. The petitioners shall surrender before respective Police within 15 days from the date of this order.
2. The petitioners shall execute personal bonds for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with two sureties for likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
- 11 -
CRL.P No. 200479 of 2023
3. The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly;
4. The petitioners shall mark their attendance before the respondent police once in 15 days preferably on Sunday between 8.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m., and sign in the Register maintained by the Station House Officer to that effect;
5. The petitioners shall not involve in similar offences and shall not leave the jurisdictional Court without prior permission;
6. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon for the purpose of further investigation and co-operate for investigation.
7. Breach of any of these conditions would entail cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE SBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9