Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: udr in Sharanabasava S/O. Hanumantha And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 March, 2019Matching Fragments
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:
It is stated in the complaint that the deceased-Ramesh said to be the younger brother of the complainant, on 26.06.2018 at around 8.00 p.m., himself, his younger brother and mother were present in the house. At that time, the accused persons came there and called the deceased-Ramesh and informed him that they want to watch the video recording of the marriage of one Vasantha. It is further stated by the complainant that himself and his mother asked the deceased-Ramesh to return early and thereafter the deceased left along with the accused. On 27.06.2018 at about 6.00 a.m., the complainant learned that his brother Ramesh was sleeping on a platform behind Panchayat Office of the village. Subsequently, the complainant and his mother went to the place, where the dead body of Ramesh was lying and found smell of alcohol emanating from the mouth of the deceased-Ramesh. Subsequently, the complainant came to know that the accused were said to be forced the deceased-Ramesh to consume alcohol and thereafter hatched plan to finish him either by pressing the testicles or strangulating. Initially, a case in UDR No.07/2018 came to be registered on the basis of the report said to be given by the complainant. But, on suspicious grounds about the accused, complainant lodged the complaint belatedly on 11.12.2018 and same was registered in Crime No.287/2018 for the aforesaid offences. During the course of the investigation, the accused said to have been apprehended and since then they are in judicial custody.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for the State who has taken me through the averments made in the complaint filed by the complainant before the police and based upon the complaint, a case in Crime No.287/2018 came to be registered. He further submits that all the accused on the date of incident consumed alcohol and forcibly made the deceased-Ramesh to consume alcohol and thereafter they had forcibly pressed the testicles and committed murder of Ramesh, which has been revealed in the complaint and there are materials against the accused to prove the offences punishable under Sections 302 & 201 R/w Section 34 of IPC. There is no dispute that initially, a case in UDR No.07/2018 came to be registered and also inquest proceedings of the dead body of the deceased-Ramesh. He further submits that on the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant on 11.12.2018 based on the suspicion statements about the accused that they have committed the murder of the deceased-Ramesh, the case in Crime No.287/2018 came to be registered. These are all the contentions taken by the learned HCGP seeking dismissal of the bail petition as the accused gave confessional statement and that itself indicates that there are prima facie materials for involvement of committing the murder of the deceased- Ramesh.
6. In the aforesaid context, all the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned HCGP appearing for the State are concerned, it is relevant to state that initially a case in UDR No.07/2018 came to be registered on 26.07.2018, subsequent to registration of UDR case, the concerned Executive Magistrate who conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased. On suspicion made against the accused that they have committed the murder of the deceased-Ramesh and on filing of the complaint by the complainant on 11.12.2018, a case in Crime No.287/2018 came to be registered, subsequently proceeded with the case for investigation. The material on record reveals that the deceased-Ramesh said to be the younger brother of the complainant namely, Hanamanth, on 26.06.2018 at about 8.00 p.m. when his brother Ramesh and also his mother were present in the house, at that time the accused who had come to the house and took the deceased Ramesh saying him as they want to watch the video recording of the marriage of one Vasantha. Therefore, the deceased accompanied with the accused, who are all as well as the deceased consumed alcohol. These are all the things narrated in the complaint said to be filed by the complainant on 11.12.2018, i.e., after lapse of more than five months and subsequent to registration of the crime against the accused, the case has been taken up for investigation by the I.O. and proceeded with the case for investigation and the I.O. has recorded the statements of the witnesses so also conducted the mahazar in the presence of the panch witnesses. But, it is relevant to state that initially a case in UDR No.7/2018 came to be registered and after lapse of considerable time of more than five months, on the basis of suspicion, the complainant filed the complaint against the accused, then the law has been set out for investigation. Therefore, at this stage, it does not require any detail discussion while considering the bail petition filed by the accused as there are substances in the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners seeking for regular bail.