High CourtsSingle Bench

Ramesha. N vs State Of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 30 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 KAR CK 0035

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohammad Nawaz, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 3559 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 824 words

Mohammad Nawaz, J

1.

The petitioner/accused No.5 has preferred this petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.167/2022 registered at Varuna Police Station, Mysuru District.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent/State and perused the material on record.

3.

The FIR is registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by Chikkaraju/CW.1, father of deceased Manoj, wherein, it is alleged that, on 09.11.2022, at about 9.20 p.m., while they were returning from their land, all the accused forming an unlawful assembly waylaid the complainant and his son and assaulted complainant's son with lethal weapons and committed his murder.

4.

The FIR is registered against 11 accused. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 in the FIR. On completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against accused Nos.1 to 9, and 11. Accused No.10 named in the FIR has been dropped and the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.5 in the charge sheet.

5.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was a member of Harohalli Mellahalli Grama Panchayat. There was a quarrel between CW.28 and the petitioner on 22.01.2022 with regard to the expenditures incurred for the work undertaken by the Grama Panchayat. In this connection, the petitioner had lodged a police complaint, which was registered in Crime No.17/2022. In the said complaint, it is alleged that the deceased had assaulted the petitioner. Further, there was a case registered in Crime No.131/2022 against the petitioner and his son, namely, accused No.6 in this case, alleging that they have attempted on the life of the deceased on 09.09.2022 at about 8.30 p.m. Hence, it is alleged that on account of the previous enmity, all the accused formed an unlawful assembly on 09.11.2022 at 9.20 p.m. and waylaid the complainant and his son Manoj when they were returning from their land in a motorcycle bearing NO.KA 09/HE 7398 and assaulted complainant's son with lethal weapons and committed his murder.

6.

The incident has taken place at about 9.20 p.m., on 09.11.2022. The complaint is lodged on the next day at about 11.00 a.m. According to the complaint, even the petitioner has assaulted the deceased. However, in the course of investigation, the statements of eyewitnesses namely, CWs. 2, 21 to 27 have been recorded. They have not stated that this petitioner has assaulted the deceased with any weapon. According to the eyewitnesses, the petitioner has held the complainant. The complainant, in his further statement has stated that the petitioner has held him. It is no doubt true that the motive is attributed against the petitioner and his son who is arraigned as accused No.6. The other accused are said to be the followers of the petitioner.

7.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that on account of previous enmity, the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He has contended that, on account of the illwill, the complainant has initially attributed certain overt acts against the petitioner. He submits that, the prosecution having come to know that he has no role to play, has now alleged that the petitioner has held the complainant so as to indict him in this case.

8.

It is relevant to see that in the complaint, it is stated that after the incident, the complainant discussed the matter with his family members and thereafter lodged the complaint. In view of the same, there is some force in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The prosecution has to establish the case against the petitioner in a full-fledged trial. It is submitted by the learned counsel, that petitioner is a heart patient and he is under medication and follow up treatment. The petitioner was arrested on 13.11.2022. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed. Hence, by imposing necessary conditions, the relief sought by the petitioner can be granted. Accordingly, the following;

ORDER

Petition is allowed.

The petitioner-accused No.5 shall be enlarged on bail in Crime No.167/2022 of Varuna Police Station, pending in CC No.430/2023 on the file of the XII Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Mysuru District, subject to following conditions;

i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

ii) Petitioner shall furnish proof of his residential address and shall inform the Court, if there is any change in the address.

iii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses/evidence either directly or indirectly.

iv) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the learned Sessions Judge, till completion of the trial.

v) Petitioner shall regularly appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing.

vi) Petitioner shall not involve in any criminal activities.

If any of the above condition is violated, prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.