Revanna vs The State of Karnataka

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.8 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail for the offences punishable under

Sections 109, 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 326, 307, 302, 114, 149 of IPC registered in respondent - police station Crime No.211/2016.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.8 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for the respondent-State.

Kirankumar is the complainant in this case and Shivakumar and Sachin are the deceased persons.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments that in the original complaint there is no whisper

about the involvement of the present petitioner Revanna in the alleged incident. But in his further statement, the complainant tried to clarify that the

name he has mentioned in the original complaint as Kumar, is in fact Revanna, the petitioner herein and by oversight, he has mentioned his name as

Kumar. However, in his further statement he has also stated that present petitioner Revanna is also involved in the case and that he assaulted one

Ashok, the injured. So far as two deceased persons are concerned, the allegation against the petitioner herein is that he assaulted them with his

limbs. Except this there is no other allegation against him. Hence, learned counsel has submitted that there is a false implication of the petitioner. In

the original complaint his name was not at all mentioned. Subsequently with deliberation the complainant has come up with the version that Kumar

himself is Revanna. He has submitted that in the charge sheet material the name of Kumar is mentioned along with his father''s name and address

and he was dropped while filing the charge sheet. Hence, he has submitted to allow the petition.

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader during the course of his arguments submitted that the prosecution material and the

statement of the witnesses speaks about the participation of the petitioner Revanna also. Two deaths have taken place in this case. Earlier also the

petitioner had approached this Court along with other accused persons. This Court by order dated 28.6.2017 in Crl.P.No.2828/2017 has

dismissed the petition as not pressed. Hence, submitted that petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.

Though in the earlier bail order of this Court dated 28.6.2017, petitioner herein has been arrayed as petitioner No.7, but except petitioner No.4,

the petition in respect of other petitioners came to be dismissed as not pressed, with liberty as sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other charge sheet materials placed on record.

As per the original complaint and as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the name of the present petitioner is not figured either in

the complaint or in the FIR. But the complainant tried to explain that he has mentioned the name of one Kumar in the original complaint thinking

that he is Revanna. But the charge sheet material shows that Kumar is different from Revanna as identified by the investigation officer and case

against him is dropped while filing the charge sheet.

The name of the petitioner was mentioned by the complainant in his further statement two days after the alleged incident i.e., on 24.9.2016.

Even if the further statement is taken into consideration, it shows that petitioner was present at the spot and he assaulted with the club on one

Ashok who is injured, but not on the deceased persons. So far as two deceased persons Sachin and Shivkumar are concerned, his further

statement shows that Revanna/petitioner herein assaulted the deceased with his upper and lower limbs. The allegations made against the petitioner

were denied by him contending that there is a false implication. He has undertaken to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by the

Court. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed. The post mortem report shows that deaths are due to the multiple injuries

sustained. In view of this material, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner.

Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused No.8 is ordered to be released on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 109,

143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 326, 307, 302, 114, 149 of IPC registered in respondent - police station Crime No.211/2016, subject to the following

conditions:

i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned

Court.

ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.

iii. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.