Karnataka High Court
Chethan @ Chethan Kumar vs State Of Karnataka on 14 January, 2022
Author: H.P. Sandesh
Bench: H.P. Sandesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10186/2021
BETWEEN:
1. CHETHAN @ CHETHANKUMAR,
S/O LATE SHIVANNA M.L.,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/O 4TH CROSS. V.V. NAGARA,
MANDYA CITY-571 401.
2. SHIVAPRASAD,
S/O SOMANNA L,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
R/O 4TH CROSS, V.V.PURAM,
KALLAHALLI, MANDYA CITY-571 401. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. RAKSHA KEERTHANA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY MANDYA WEST POLICE STATION,
REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT
(BY VINAYAKA V.S., HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN
S.C.NO.84/2021 - CR.NO.70/2021 OF MANDYA WEST POLICE
STATION, MANDYA DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 341, 342, 323, 324, 504, 506,
302 AND 201 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 75
2
OF JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioners in Crime No.70/2021 of Mandya West Police Station, Mandya District, for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 342, 323, 324, 504, 506, 302 and 201 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice Act.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that the deceased Darshan and daughter of accused Nos.1 and 2 i.e., C.W.2 Manvitha fell in love. On the date of the incident i.e., on 15.04.2021, when the accused persons were in the house, C.W.2 said to have invited Darshan to her house and when both of them were staying together in the room in the midnight, it came to the knowledge of accused No.1 and his family members and 3 accused persons assaulted the deceased. Accused No.1 assaulted with wooden club and caused the injuries and other accused who came to the house also subjected the deceased for assault and the injured was taken to the hospital and he succumbed to the injuries and a case has been registered and investigated the matter and filed the charge-sheet.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in total 17 accused are arraigned in the case and this Court has already enlarged accused Nos.7 to 11 and also accused Nos.3 and 8 on bail in Cr.P.Nos.7283/2021 and 8964/2021, respectively and these petitioners also stand in the same footing. This Court has to take note of the fact in respect of the petitioners and there is no overt-act allegations against these petitioners and only allegation is that they assaulted the deceased with hands and these petitioners are similarly placed. Hence, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that the allegations against these two petitioners are not that they assaulted with hands and particularly accused No.5 dragged the 4 deceased and thereafter he inflicted injury with the hand of the spade and accused No.6 inflicted injury with wooden stick and also injuries found in the post mortem report clearly discloses multiple injuries and there are 23 injuries and hence the petitioners are not entitled for bail.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State, no doubt 17 accused are arraigned in the case and the material discloses that at the first instance, parents of C.W.2 noticed the deceased in the room in which their daughter C.W.2 was staying and found the deceased in a naked posture and immediately accused No.1 assaulted him and in the meanwhile relatives of accused No.1 also gathered and among them these two petitioners are relatives of the other accused who subjected the deceased for assault. When the specific allegations are made against accused Nos.5 and 6 that they inflicted injury with the hand of the spade as well as wooden stick and taking note of the factual aspects of bail granted in favour of other accused persons, which has been referred supra, the allegation against them is that they assaulted with their hands and the same is found in column No.17 and when such 5 being the factual aspects of the case, it cannot be held that the petitioners are entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is not a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioners when specific over-act allegations are made against the petitioners.
7. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition is rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE MD