Karnataka High Court
Rajashekhar @ Hotte Raja vs State Of Karnataka By on 23 September, 2019
Author: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S. Sunil Dutt Yadav
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5578/2019
BETWEEN:
Rajashekhar @ Hotte Raja,
S/o. Late Venkatappa,
Aged about 45 years,
Residing at No.7, 8th main,
17th 'A' Cross, Agrahara Dasarahalli,
Vijayanagara, Bengaluru-560040.
.....Petitioner
(By Sri Prasanna Kumar P., Adv.)
AND
State of Karnataka
By Magadi Road Police Station,
Vijayanagara,
Represented by State Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Karnataka Building,
Ambedkar Veedhi,
Bengaluru-560001.
.....Respondent
(By Sri Rohit B.J., H.C.G.P.)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. by the advocate for the petitioner praying that this
Hon'ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on
2
bail in Cr.No.217/2018 of Magadi Road Police Station,
Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Sections
143, 147, 148, 120(B), 448, 307, 302 read with Section 149
of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders, through
Video Conference, this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER
The petitioner who is accused No.5 is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in S.C.No.332/2019 arising out of Crime No.217/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 120(B), 448, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant Smt. Parvathamma is the wife of deceased Ranganatha Nayak. On 12.10.2018, as per the order of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, the B.D.A., has demolished the house of accused No.1. In that regard, on 14.10.2019 at 9-30 a.m., the accused called the deceased for discussion, in between 10-45 a.m., and 11.00 a.m., one of the employee of the school namely 3 Smt. Mangalamma, came to the house of complainant and told that her husband was killed/murdered. Immediately, the complainant went to Pristine Hospital and saw the dead body of her husband. One Mallesh, who was working there at the place of incident informed that when the deceased was sitting in the Secretary Room of Havanur Public School, the accused entered the room and stabbed on the chest, neck and head with dragger and other sharp weapons like chopper, knife and caused fatal injuries and committed his murder.
3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 23.10.2019, investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that even as per the imputation made in the charge sheet, it is alleged that the petitioner was present at the scene of crime and was a part of the conspiracy.
4
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the imputation in the charge sheet as regards to infliction of injuries resulting in death is as against accused Nos.1 to 4. The said facts relating to the imputation made to accused Nos.1 to 4 and nature of imputation as regards accused No.5 herein and accused No.8 is not in dispute. The counsel for the petitioner also points out that this Court by order dated 30.05.2019 while disposing of Crl.P.No.1399/2018 had enlarged accused No.8 on bail while observing the role of accused No.8 as attributed in the charge sheet.
4. It is to be noted that the statement of witnesses also point out the involvement of the petitioner by making a phone call and calling upon the deceased to come to the scene of crime, no further imputation as regards causing injuries is forthcoming. The question as to the involvement of the accused in the conspiracy and his role in commission of crime in light 5 of the imputation made, is a matter to be proved during trial.
5. The Sessions Court while disposing of the petition has observed that the circumstances and facts make out a role of accused No.5 in enticing the deceased to come and negotiate. However, the said aspect is a matter to be established in the trial. The present proceedings cannot be construed to be punitive in nature. Noting that the investigation is complete and charge sheet is filed and that the role of the petitioner as made out from the material on record is similar to that accused No.8, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in S.C.No.332/2019 arising out of Crime No.217/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 448 and 6 302 read with Section 120B of IPC subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE Naa