Karnataka High Court
Chikkanna S/Oo Hanumanthappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 July, 2018
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K.Somashekar
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100261 OF 2018
BETWEEN
CHIKKANNA S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O: HULIGEMMA TEMPLE,
RUPUNGUDI ROAD, BALLARI.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.B.ANWAR BASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
(THROUGH GANDHINAGAR P.S.)
REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH CURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH AT DHARWAD.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION GRANT
REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.134/2015 IN SC NO.108/2015
REGISTERED BY GANDHINAGAR POLICE STATION, BALLARI
DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTION
302,381,464,468,471, R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING TRIAL OF
THE CASE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
:2:
ORDER
This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner - accused No.2 under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Gandhinagar P.S. in Crime No.134 of 2015 for offences punishable under Sections 302, 381, 464, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Since from the date of 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 - accused No.2 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 offences and thereafter, the investigation was conducted by the Investigation Officer. The allegations made in the FIR recorded by the Police reveals that on 05.06.2015 at :3: about 6:45 a.m. accused No.2 called over telephone and informed the complainant that her mother is not responding. Immediately the complainant and her husband came to the house and poured water into the bedroom, but the deceased did not woke up. Thereafter, they break open the lock and went inside the room and noticed that her mother was lying and they immediately shifted her to VIMS Hospital, Ballari. The Doctor after examining her declared that she is brought dead. It is further averred that on 16.06.2015, when the complainant was verifying the documents pertaining to her mother, the bank pass book, cheque book and the gold ornaments of her mother were missing. Accordingly, on filing of the complaint, a case came to be registered against the accused, as this petitioner being arraigned as accused No.2 and the case has been taken up for investigation by Investigating Officer and laid the charge sheet for the aforesaid offences.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments has taken through the :4: complaint filed by the complainant, the FIR recorded by the Police in Crime No.134 of 2015 and submits that the co-accused Nos.1 and 3 have already been granted bail by this Court by imposing certain conditions as specified therein, as this accused as well as those accused are on the similar footing for the aforesaid offences. He further submits that initially a case was registered in UDR No.11 of 2015. Subsequent to filing of the complaint, a case came to be registered and thereafter to proceed with the investigation by the Investigating Officer, who laid the charge sheet and the entire case rests on the circumstantial evidence. 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 arrest. It is further contended that the petitioner is ready :5: 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.
5. 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.134 of 2015 for the aforesaid offences. He further submits that there are prima facie materials against the accused to commit the alleged offences such as murder by participating with the accused No.1 and 3. He further submits that when the complainant was verifying the documents pertaining to her mother, pass book, cheque book and the gold ornaments of her mother were missing. 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.
:6:
6. Having regard to the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned HCGP for the respondent - State and having gone through the materials that is the complaint as well as the materials reflected in the FIR and also the materials collected by the Investigating Officer, it is relevant to state that initially a case was registered in UDR No.11 of 2015 relating to the death of the deceased. On receipt of telephonic message from accused No.2 stating that her mother is not responding, the complainant and her husband came to the house and poured water into the bed room, but the deceased did not woke up. Thereafter they break open the lock and went inside the room and noticed that her mother was lying and they immediately shifted her to VIMS Hospital, Ballari. The Doctor after examining declared that she is brought dead. On 16.06.2015, when the complainant was verifying the documents pertaining to her mother found that passbook, cheque book and gold ornaments were missing. These materials have been reflected in the :7: charge sheet laid by the Investigating Officer against the accused, where the accused are required to face trial for the alleged offences. Further, this Court granted bail to accused Nos.1 and 3 by imposing certain conditions in Crl.P.No.101219 of 2015, dated 2nd November 2015 and Crl.P.100261 of 2017, dated 27th February 2017 respectively. However, it is necessary to state at this stage that though materials have been collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of Investigation for the alleged offences against the petitioner to laying the charge sheet and to framing the charge. But it cannot be said that there are enough materials to decline the relief of bail, merely because for allegation made against the petitioner.
7. Therefore, keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, it is said that it does not require any detailed discussion, while considering the bail petition filed by the petitioner, as there are substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking for the relief of bail. :8: Whereas, the learned HCGP submits that if the petitioner is supposed to be released 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. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as under the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is deserving 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.1,00,000/- with like sum surety to the satisfaction of the Court below in S.C.No.108/2015 which is pending on the file of II-Additional Sessions Judge, Ballari.
:9:
(2) The petitioner shall not tamper or
hamper the case of prosecution
witnesses.
(3) The petitioner shall appear before the
Court on all the dates of hearing without fail.
(4) The petitioner shall not indulge with any other criminal activities henceforth.
If the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.
SD/-
JUDGE Vnp*