Karnataka High Court
Devidas S/O Damla Power And Ors vs The State Through Police Kushnoor ... on 28 July, 2014
Author: Rathnakala
Bench: Rathnakala
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.200588/2014
BETWEEN:
1. DEVIDAS S/O DAMLA POWER
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
CAST LAMBADI OCC- AGRICULTURE
R/O JEEMAL THANDA MAHADONGOAN
TQ.AURAD (B)
DIST. BIDAR - 585401
2. KISHAN S/O DEVIDAS POWER
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
CAST LAMBANI, OCC: AGRI
R/O.JEEMAL THANDA MAHADONGAON,
TQ. AURAD (B), DIST. BIDAR - 585401
3. PERSURAM S/O DEVIJI RATHOD
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O HARINAYAK THANDA,
KOREKAL TQ. AURAD-B
DIST. BIDAR - 585401
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI MANURE ASHOK KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH POLICE
2
KUSHNOOR POLICE BIDAR
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSEUCTOR
HIGH COURT GULBARGA - 585
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI S.S.ASPALLI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS PRAYING THAT
THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO, ALLOW THIS
PETITION AND DIRECT THE PRL. J.M.F.C. COURT, AURAD, TQ.
AURAD, DIST. BIDAR AND TO RELEASE THE ACCUSED /
PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN C.C. NO.206/2014 (CRIME NO.153/2013 OF
KUSHNOOR POLICE STATION, DIST. BIDAR), WHICH IS
REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss.302, 396, 397 AND 450 OF
IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail in Crime No.153/2013 of Kushnoor Police Station registered against the petitioners. The petitioners are charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 396, 397 and 450 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is:
3
These petitioners are involved in 17 cases registered at Janavada Police Station, Balki Rural Police Station, Santhanoor Police Station etc. for various offences. In the present case, it is alleged that on 5.10.2013, the petitioners along with accused Nos.4 and 5 with an intention to commit dacoity, proceeded to the lonely house of the deceased Jija Bai; while Jija Bai was sleeping on a cot in front of the house, the brother of the deceased / CW.1 / eyewitness was also sleeping in front of the house. The accused assaulted them with fatal blows, trespassed into the house, threatened the inmates of the house - CWs.18 and 19 and under the knife point exhorted their gold ornaments and so also the gold earrings of the deceased and fled away.
3. Sri Manur Ashok Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are falsely implicated by the police in 17 cases though they are not involved in those cases. They are innocent persons; first 4 petitioner is aged 70 years and the second petitioner is his son, since charge sheet is filed they are not required any more by the investigating officer. No identification parade as contemplated under Section 9 of the Evidence Act was conducted by the Investigating Officer, hence, the identity of the culprits of the alleged incidence is not established. Therefore, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.
4. As against this, Sri S.S.Aspalli, learned HCGP for the State submits that, initially, case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 394 and 450 of the IPC. Since the victim of the incident - Jija Bai expired due to the fatal injuries suffered by her during the incident, the Investigating Officer has charge sheeted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 396 and 397 and 450 of IPC. The offence if proved will take the accused for the major punishment of life imprisonment or death. In the presence of panch witnesses, the stolen articles are seized by the Investigating Officer and mahazaar is drawn. 5 Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for bail and the petition is liable to be rejected.
5. It is a fact that another two petitioners filed in Crl.P.Nos.200645/2014 and 200573/2014 have also come up for consideration today. In those two petitions also, the petitioners and the nature of the allegations are similar. The concern is, whether enlarging the petitioners on bail facilitates them to pursue further offence against the society.
As the charge sheet itself suggest the petitioners are involved in 17 cases, registered by the various police station; though the petitioners do not admit their involvement in the cases, they do not dispute that these cases are registered against them. In the case on hand, the Investigating Officer has not only seized the gold ornaments, weapons pertaining to this case but also stolen properties pertaining to other crimes allegedly committed by these petitioners for commission of the offence are also 6 seized at the instance of these petitioners. Since it is demonstrated by the prosecution that the accused are involved in multiple cases and the offences in the present case is proved during the trial, is answerable with major punishment. In my view, it is not in the interest of justice to enlarge them on bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. However, the trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial within six months from the date of receipt of this order. Office to mark a copy of this order to the concerned court.
Sd/-
JUDGE nvj