Mir Umar vs State of Karnataka

A.S. Pachhapure, J.—It is alleged that on 03.07.2010 at about. 9.00 p.m. the complainant heard quarrel in the basement of the hotel. The Elite Royale and found that Rahul Sarkar [deceased] who was working in the kitchen section of the hotel and the Petitioner were quarreling. The complainant went to pacify them, but the Petitioner pushed the complainant, as a result he fell and sustained simple injury. Thereafter, the Petitioner took an empty beer bottle from a box kept near by, hit the bottle to the wall and with the use of the broken bottle, stabbed in between the thighs of Rahul Sarkar [deceased]. On account of which, Rahul Sarkar fell down with severe bleeding injury. The Petitioner ran away from the spot. The injured was taken to hospital for treatment. During the treatment, he succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. In this regard, a case was registered against the Petitioner for the offence punishable u/s 302 IPC,

The Petitioner claims that he is innocent and has not committed any offence much less the one alleged. He is ready and willing to abide by any condition/s that may be imposed for his release on bail. Furthermore, it is his submission that at the most, the offence may fall u/s 304 IPC and not u/s 302 IPC. It is also the case of the Petitioner that before the assault, there was quarrel and the incident was due to sudden provocation in a spur of moment. Therefore, submits to grant the bail.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and also the learned High Court Government Pleader.

Though the perusal of the complaint reveals that both the deceased and the Petitioner were quarrelling at the time of the incident, at this stage there is no material as to at whose instance the quarrel commenced. Therefore, it cannot be said that prima facie an offence u/s 304 has been committed. Furthermore, as could be seen from the nature of the allegations, the Petitioner initially pushed the complainant, who had come to pacify both the deceased and the Petitioner, as a result the complainant fell down and sustained injury. Thereafter, the Petitioner/accused took an empty beer bottle from a box and hit it on the wall and by use of the broken beer bottle, caused severe injury by stabbing in between the thighs of Rahul Sarkar [deceased] and because of the severe bleeding, the injured, succumbed to the injuries in the hospital on the same day.

Taking into, consideration prima facie conduct of the Petitioner, it cannot be said that the assault is on the thighs. It is mentioned in the complaint itself that the injury was caused in between thighs which is the vital portion of the body and the injured succumbed to the injuries. Mere fact that there was a quarrel itself is not sufficient ground to conclude prima facie that the incident has taken place due to sudden provocation or in a spur of moment. When the complainant came to pacify both the persons, the act of the Petitioner pushing the complainant prima facie reveals his conduct and thereafter, taking an empty beer bottle with an intention to cause injury by use of the broken beer bottle, prima facie reflects the criminal mind to cause the death. In the circumstances, taking into consideration the gravity and seriousness of the crime, if the Petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility that he may give a threat to the witnesses, who are the workers in the hotel and thereby interfere with the trial of the case. In that view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the Petitioner is not entitled to the bail sought, for.

In the circumstances, the petition is dismissed with a direction to the trial Court to frame the charge/s immediately, on committal of the case conclude the trial expeditiously.