Neelakantagouda vs State of Karnataka

A.S. Pachhapure, J.—The petitioner in Cri. P. No. 15956/2012 has sought for grant of bail having been arrested in Crime No. 96/2012 of Mudgal police station registered for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 r/w Sec. 34 of IPC. Whereas the petitioners in the later petition have approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in the aforesaid crime. Both the cases are taken together as they are arise out of the same incident. The petitioners are the son, wife and daughter of Shekaragouda (deceased). The deceased was in habit of consuming liquor and therefore, it is alleged that the petitioners were abusing him alleging that he has degraded the family having been addicted to habit of consuming liquor. The petitioners were also asserting that in case if he dies his son would get compassionate appointment and a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-.

On 28.07.2012 at about 7.00 p.m. it is alleged that the petitioners were beating the deceased and neighbours intervened, the complainant who is the mother of the deceased said to have gone to her daughter''s house. On 30.07.2012 at about 4.30 p.m. the dead body of Shekaragouda was found in a room wherein an engine was installed and in the circumstances, the mother of the deceased filed a complaint before the police stating that the petitioners have caused the death of Shekaragouda and shifted the dead body to the engine room to cause disappearance of the evidence.

The petitioners submit that they are innocent and they have not committed any crime and are falsely implicated in the incident. The petitioner - Neelakantagouda is said to be a student, aged about 21 years and the petitioners in the later case are the women being the wife and daughter of the deceased. They submit that they are ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that may be imposed by this Court for their release on bail. The learned High Court government pleader opposed the application.

The incident is alleged to have taken place on 28.07.2012. The post-mortem report produced reveals that there were no fractures of any bones and no external injuries. The doctor stated that the opinion can be given after the FSL report is received. The learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the report of Forensic Science Laboratory is yet to be received. There are no eye-witnesses to the incident. No investigation is held till now, it appears the Investigating Officer has collected no materials and except the allegations in the complaint there appear no other materials against the petitioners. The son of the deceased is aged about 21 years and is said to be a student. He has been in custody for the last two months. The fact that he has been in judicial custody itself reveals that his presence is not necessary for the purpose of investigation. Taking into consideration the fact that he is a young boy aged about 21 years and a student and fact that there is no prima facie material at this stage, I think he is entitled to the bail sought for. 5. Even as regards, the petitioners in the later case, the first petitioner is the wife of the deceased whereas the second petitioner is the daughter, aged about 19 years. Prima facie, at this stage there is no material against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC. In that view of the matter, the petitioners entitled to anticipatory bail sought for. In the result, the petitions are allowed. The petitioner in Cri. P. No. 15956/2012 is ordered to be released on bail on his executing personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Sessions Court. Whereas the petitioners in Cri. P. No. 15957/2012 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in the aforesaid crime on their executing personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- each with two solvent sureties each to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority with the further following conditions:

i) That the petitioner - Neelakantagouda shall attend the police station on every Sunday in between 10.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m. until filing of the charge-sheet

ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

iii) They shall not jump bail.

If any of the conditions are violated, the bail granted entails cancellation.

Intimate the concerned authority.