Karnataka High Court
Mr P Dinesh Shetty vs The State on 23 January, 2018
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4859/2017
BETWEEN:
1. Mr. P Dinesh Shetty
Aged 41 years
S/o Vishwanath Shetty
R/at Patla House
Karopadi Village and Post
Bantwal Taluk.
2. Mr. Vinod Kumar Shetty
Aged 30 years
S/o Raghunath Shetty
R/at Patla House
Karopadi Village and Post
Bantwal Taluk.
3. Mr. Pradeep Shetty
Aged 32 years
S/o Sanjeeva Shetty
R/at Palige House
Kudpalthadka Post
Karopady Village
Bantwal Taluk-571 650. .. PETITIONERS
(By Sri P P Hegde, Adv.)
2
AND:
1. The State - Through the Circle Inspector of Police
Vitla Police Station
Bantwal
Represented by the State Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka
Bengaluru-560 001.
2. Mr. A. Mohammad Anwar
S/o. Haji A Usman
Aged 33 years
Arasalike House
Karopady Post, Karopady village
Vittla Hobki, Buntwal Taluk
D.K. District - 574 279 .. RESPONDENTS
(By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP for R1
Sri B Lethif, Adv. for R2)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the
event of their arrest in Cr.No.83/2017 of Vitla P.S.,
Dakshina Kannada for the offences P/U/Ss 448, 302,
506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition having been heard and
reserved for orders on 11.1.2018, coming on for
pronouncement of order this day, the Court made the
following:
3
ORDER
This petition is filed by petitioners/accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 302, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent-police station Crime No.83/2017.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, on 20.4.2017 at about 11.35 a.m. complainant received a phone call from his relative Abbas stating that some unknown four persons have assaulted his brother Abdul Jaleel inside the Vice President chamber of Gram Panchayath and when he went to the spot he saw his brother was lying in a pool of blood in his chamber with injuries over his head, neck, shoulder, arms and stomach and on enquiry, he came to know through Panchayath Development Officer one Madhav that at 4 about 11.30 a.m. four persons came in motorcycles and threatened him and entered chamber of the deceased with a cardboard box in their hands and threw chilly powder over the face of the deceased and assaulted with long machete all over the body of the deceased. On hearing the hue and cry of the deceased, complainant and his staff members along with others went towards chamber and saw the deceased being assaulted thereafter, assailants after assaulting the deceased came out and threatening everyone with dire consequences if they disclose the incident to anyone and went in motorcycles. Complainant took the deceased to the hospital, but by the time they reached the hospital the deceased had succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of the complaint filed, case has been registered against the petitioners for the above said offences.
3. The case of the petitioners as per the petition averments are, on the basis of the complaint of one 5 A.Mahammad Anwar, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.83/2017 of the respondent-police stating that Mr.Abdul Jaleel was murdered by four unknown persons on 20.4.2017 at Karopady Grama Panchayath building, Karopady village, Bantwal taluk. In the course of investigation, police have arrested 11 accused persons and in the remand report dated 30.4.2017 they were produced before the Civil Judge and JMFC., Bantwal, D.K. alleging that all the accused persons are directly involved in committing the murder and three of the accused persons who are arrayed as accused Nos.12, 13 and 14 are said to be absconding. Accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 were taken to police custody from the jurisdictional Court by the police on 30.4.2017 and produced again on 2.5.2017 and they are remanded to judicial custody and again on 10.5.2017 accused Nos.1 to 11 were taken to police custody from jurisdictional Court by the police and they were produced on 12.5.2017. Names of the present petitioners are not mentioned in any of the remand reports filed to the 6 Court or report submitted after the police custody. However, on 10.5.2017, investigating officer filed the requisition to jurisdictional Court to issue search warrant for the purpose of searching of the houses of these petitioners. After conduct of the investigation, at the residence of these petitioners, investigating officer submitted report to the jurisdictional Court stating that "for the purpose of searching house of some suspicious persons who involved in the above crime number for the purpose of searching mobile handsets, laptops, bank accounts and other documents available in the respective houses'. Hence, the jurisdictional Court issued search warrant to conduct the search in the houses of these petitioners. After issuance of search warrant, the police have started searching for the petitioners herein to arrest them. The petition filed by the petitioners before the Sessions Court, D.K., Mangaluru, came to be dismissed. On these grounds, petitioners have sought for grant of anticipatory bail. 7
4. The respondent-State opposed the petition by filing objection statement contending that during the course of investigation, the investigation agency sought permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate to include the offence punishable under Sections 120(B), 201, 109, 212 of IPC and under Sections 5, 37, 39 of Money Lenders Act and Sections 3 and 4 of Exorbitant Interest Act and also under Section 3 of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act, 2000, as the accused are the members of the Organized Crime syndicate and have committed the offence in furtherance of their organized criminal activity for undue gain.
During the course of investigation, police have recorded statement of witnesses and further statement of the complainant. The investigation reveals that petitioners are part of conspiracy and have played active role in the commission of murder. The statement of witness reveals that petitioner No.1 P.Dinesh Shetty (A15) and deceased belongs to same political party. Both are members of Gram Panchayath, Karopady. 8 During election to the post of Vice President of the said Gram Panchayath both aspired for the said post and during the meeting held at the house of deceased attended by other Gram Panchayath members, absconding accused A-14 Balakrishnashetty @ Vikkishetty on the instigation of petitioner No.1 had made phone call from abroad and threatened deceased and his father to elect his cousin i.e., petitioner No.1 to the above said post, but in spite of threat, deceased got elected as Vice President and hence both petitioner No.1 and accused No.14 were nursing grudge against the deceased. The threatening phone call of the above said conversation was witnessed by the other members of the meeting and one of the members had also spoken to the said accused No.14 requesting him not to make a big issue of election to the post of Vice President. Accused No.14 being annoyed that his cousin petitioner No.1 herein was not being elected as a Vice President had threatened that he would eliminate the deceased. 9
Accused No.14 is a habitual offender and oversees based underworld fugitive. There are 7 other cases registered against accused No.14. Accused No.14 is also relative of petitioner No.3 and friend of petitioner No.2 and it has come out during investigation that petitioners were running finance business and through accused No.14 used to give threat call to borrowers. Petitioners were charging exorbitant interest from the borrowers and deceased had requested them not to charge exorbitant interest and harass the borrowers which was disliked by the petitioners. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 wanted to transport sand illegally, but deceased as a Vice President of Gram Panchyath has not given permission for illegal sand mining and transportation. The statement further reveals that petitioners were nursing grudge against deceased on the pretext that he had helped one Betha Mose to obtain injunction order and had not withdrawn criminal case filed against the followers of petitioners even on the say of accused No.14 and suspected deceased was behind Betha Mose. The 10 statement of witnesses clearly reveals that petitioners were nursing grudge against the deceased as he had become hindrance to their illegal activities.
The investigation record and the statement of witnesses further reveals that accused No.1 was also part of conspiracy to murder deceased as the accused No.1 had thought that deceased was behind the cases being registered against him filed by forest officials for committing forest offences and also in IPC offences which were registered by the respondent police in Crime Nos.148/2013, 166/2015 and 334/2016 and also civil dispute between his father and himself and also in elopement of Hindu girl with a Muslim boy.
Investigation records show that accused No.14 is the master mind behind the offence and conspiracy was hatched among accused Nos.14, 1 and 2 and the petitioners through internet (VOIP) calls and executed through A3 to A6. As per the conspiracy, A1 sheltered the other accused, supplied swords, chilly powder and also helped the assailants to escape from the incident. 11 A10 gave his motorcycle for the commission of offence and another motorcycle was stolen and A9 to A11 helped in screening the offenders and conspired to mislead the investigation. A12, A8 along with A1 were regularly watching the movements of deceased and on the day of incident passed on information to assailants about the presence of deceased at Gram Panchayath office and he was done to death as per their plan.
It is further contended that materials collected during investigation clearly show that petitioners have played active role in the commission of offence along with other accused. Petitioners along with other accused are part of organized crime syndicate run by A14 Balakrishna Shetty @ Vikky Shetty and conspired and eliminated the deceased as he was their political opponent and also a hindrance to their illegal activities and looking into the illegal activities of the accused, the provision of Section 3 of Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act, 2000 is being invoked against all the accused including the petitioners.
12
The assailants have murdered the deceased when he was in his chamber at Village Panchayath office at
11. a.m. in front of all the officials and public that too in broad daylight by mercilessly assaulting deceased all over body. The P.M. report reveals that the deceased suffered 21 injuries which are chop wound, stab wound and incised wound and most of the injuries are on head, face, neck, shoulder and arms, which clearly shows the bestiality of the attack.
During investigation, the investigation agency obtained search warrant, search the house and shop of the petitioners wherein blank cheques, signed blank papers, signed blank pro-notes, ledgers, hard disc, pen drive, vehicle documents of the borrowers were seized and subjected to P.F. Petitioner No.3 is accused in crime No.34/2017 for the offence punishable under Sections 504, 506 and 448 of IPC registered by the respondent-police.
Petitioners are financially very strong and politically influential. They are trying to give this 13 incident a communal colour and the area in which the incident has happened is communally sensitive zone and the incident has drawn attention of public at large and the deceased is a Vice President of Karopady Gram Panchayath.
Investigation is still in progress and investigation agency have still to collect vital piece of evidence through petitioners and same can only be done under a custodial interrogation. Petitioners are absconding and same has caused great hindrance to the progress of the investigation. Accused No.14 who is hiding in foreign country is also yet to be arrested.
There is a strong motive for commission of offence of murder. The petitioners have committed the offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
It is further submitted in the objection statement that deceased A.Abdul Jaleel has been brutally murdered in a well planned criminal conspiracy. The accused also tried to destroy the evidence to escape from the criminal prosecution. The investigation is still 14 in progress. In view of the gravity of offence and the manner in which it is committed the petitioners are not entitled for the relief of anticipatory bail. It is also the strong apprehension of the prosecution that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, then, they may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and hamper the prosecution case and in that event, the prosecution will be put to irreparable hardship. Petitioners fleeing from justice is also not ruled out. Hence, sought for rejection of the bail petition.
5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners-accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners during the course of his arguments has submitted that looking to the entire materials on the side of the prosecution there is no prima facie case as against any of the petitioners herein for the commission of alleged offences. Because 15 of the political grudge and the communal clashes, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. Petitioner No.1 is a businessman and also the member of Gram Panchayath. Petitioner No.2 is running registered finance and is also an agriculturist and petitioner No.3 is also running registered finance. There are no criminal antecedents against any of the petitioners. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not at all required in the case. The houses of all the three petitioners were searched. All the documents were seized and till today, the documents are not at all returned to the petitioners. Learned counsel further submitted that now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed. So far as the petitioners are concerned, the offences alleged are under Sections 5, 37, and 39 of the Money Lenders Act and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Exorbitant Interest Act and accordingly, permission was sought before the Court to continue the investigation as against the petitioners. Learned counsel further submitted that though it is 16 contended in the objection statement that the offence under Section 3 of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes act, 2000 is also attracted, the same has been given up while filing the charge sheet. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to page No.10 of the charge sheet and submitted that the FSL reports are yet to be received and also the role played by accused Nos.13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 is yet to be ascertained and the investigation continued as per Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. However, there is no material collected against the petitioners by the investigation agency implicating them in the alleged offences. Hence, the question of involvement of the petitioners even under the provisions of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act, 2000 does not arise at all. All the three petitioners are having reasonable apprehension of their arrest at the hands of respondent-police. They are prepared to co-operate with the investigation agency as and when called for, for further investigation in the matter and are also ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by 17 the Court. Accordingly, it is submitted that petitioners may be granted with anticipatory bail.
7. Per-contra, learned High Court Government Pleader during the course of his arguments has submitted that even though charge sheet is submitted before the Court, the investigation is not yet completed. It is necessary to continue further investigation in the matter and accordingly, the Investigation officer has mentioned in the charge sheet that investigation will be continued as per Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. He has submitted that the deceased was the Vice President of Gram Panchayath and he is murdered in the broad daylight when he was in his office, with deadly weapons. He has submitted that the petitioner No.1 Dinesh Shetty was also the aspirant for the post of Vice President and accused No.14 is the relative of petitioner No.1 herein. In the election for the post of Vice President the deceased got elected. Therefore, there was political grudge between the deceased and the petitioners so 18 also, accused No.14 and other accused persons. Hence, they conspired together and hatched a plan to eliminate the deceased. He also submitted that one of the offence alleged is also under Section 3 of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act 2000. The matter is still under investigation and petitioners are absconding. As against petitioner No.1 Dinesh Shetty there are many other criminal cases. Even as against petitioners Nos.2 and 3 there are other criminal cases registered. The incident has taken place in the broad daylight and when the deceased was in his Gram Panchayath office and it has drawn the attention of the entire public at large. Due to this incident the situation at the said place was under tense. Many police officers and officials were deployed to the said place. As the alleged offences are very serious in nature and punishable with death or imprisonment for life, petitioners are not entitled to be granted with anticipatory bail, till the completion of further investigation.
19
8. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and the entire charge sheet material.
9. So far as the petitioners are concerned, the investigation officer has made a requisition to the jurisdictional Court and obtained the search warrant and also conducted search in the residential houses of the petitioners and have seized the documents. The said documents are mentioned in detail in the objection statement. It is the contention of the respondent-police that the petitioners herein were granting loans with exorbitant rate of interest to the borrowers and also obtaining documents from the borrowers with their signatures on the blank papers and the deceased objected to the petitioners for the same. Hence, all the three petitioners were having grudge against the deceased. It is also the contention of the prosecution in the objection statement that the deceased being the Vice President of Gram Panchayath had not granted 20 permission to the relatives of accused No.14 for the transportation of sand illegally and that was also one of the reasons for the enmity between accused No.14 and his relatives towards the deceased. Further, petitioner No.1 was also one of the aspirant for the post of Vice President, who is the close relative of accused No.14 and since in the election deceased got elected, it was the main reason for the petitioners and the other accused persons to have the enmity towards the deceased and as per the prosecution, because of that reason, the accused persons have committed the murder of the deceased.
Looking to the objection statement filed by the prosecution, the matter is still under investigation and as against the petitioners herein serious allegations are made. Since the petitioners were said to be charging exorbitant interest rates on the money lent by them to the borrowers and also obtaining signatures on the blank papers, it was opposed to by the deceased, as 21 such, there was said to be enmity by the petitioners towards the deceased.
10. With regard to the allegations that the incident took place in the chamber of the deceased in the Grama Panchayat office, the statement of the president of the Grama Panchayat, Smt. Baby R. Shetty and the other witnesses, prima facie, shows that the deceased was assaulted in his chamber when he was attending to work. Regarding the allegation of prosecution that petitioner No.1 herein was the aspirant for the post of Vice President of the Grama Panchayat, Karopadi village, the statement of Smt. Agmesh D'Souza goes to show about the said aspect wherein she has stated that Dinesh Shetty was the member of Vadiyur ward and he was aspirant to the post of Vice President. The second paragraph of the said statement of Smt. Agmesh D'Souza dated 22.5.2017, goes to show that on 29.6.2015, the meeting of Congress party was going on in the house of Hazi A Usman and in their presence 22 itself, there was a phone call from Vicky Shetty i.e., accused No.14, stating that they will not leave Usman and A. Abdul Jaleel i.e., the deceased and posed life threat number of times. Haji A. Usman receiving the phone call said that they were going to act according to the decision of the workers of their party and whatever he is going to do, he can do. There is also the statement that thereafter, the said phone was given to Dinesh Shetty (petitioner No.1 herein), thereafter to Mithun Rai and after that, to Prakash Shetty and they also talked over the phone.
11. Similar statement was made by another witness Smt. Sharada and Smt. Surekha in their statement given before the investigating officer. Therefore, these materials prima facie would show that accused No.14 was very much interested for getting petitioner No.1 Dinesh shetty to be elected as the Vice President of Grama Panchayat. Therefore, for this motive by the prosecution, there is a material placed. 23
12. The further case of the prosecution that the accused No.14 who is staying abroad is having the crime syndicate and even the petitioners herein are also the members of the said crime syndicate and they are involved in committing the alleged offence under section 3 of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act, 2000. The material also goes to show that the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet before the Court intimating that they are doing further investigation in the matter as per Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, it goes to show that the matter is still under investigation. The alleged offences are serious in nature. Hence, considering all these aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that it is not a case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the petition is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE Bkp/cs/-