Shri. Basappa Balappa Jogali, vs The State of Karnataka

This petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused

No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for his release on regular

bail in Crime No.129/2017 of Mudhol Police Station,

registered for the offence punishable under Sections 143,

147, 148, 120-B, 302, 201 r/w 149 of IPC . Since from the

date of his arrest, the accused is in judicial custody.

Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner is praying for

enlargement of the petitioner on regular bail among the

grounds urged therein.

The brief facts of the prosecution case are as

under;

On the filing of the complaint by the complainant before

the respondent police the crime came to be registered alleging

the murder of Sanju Gurapp Kolhar. It is averred in the

complaint that on 07.04.2017 at about 9.00 p.m., the

complainant''s son had gone to Malapur village on the

motorcycle of Basappa stating that he is going for religious

function of his friend. Since his son did not return late night

and his mobile was switched off. On the next day i.e. on

08.04.2017 at about 7.00 a.m., when the complainant was

proceeding to distribute milk at Shirol Cross, that he noticed

several persons were assembled near the land of one

Shashikant Lad stating that there was a dead body lying.

Thereafter, he saw the dead body, he identified the said dead

body as that of his son Sanju with injuries over his head,

ears, eyebrow and other parts of his body and blood was

spread all over face and the motorcycle was lying near the

dead body. Feeling that someone who was inimical towards

his son has committed his murder. Thereafter, he lodged the

complaint to the respondent police wherein the crime came to

be registered and the Investigating Officer has taken up the

case for investigation and laid the charge sheet against the

accused.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned HCGP for the respondent - State.

Whereas the learned counsel for the petitioner

during the course of arguments has been contended that the accused is innocent person and he has not at all committed

the alleged offences and he has been arrayed in the alleged

crime that he was also participated with other accused to

commit the murder of deceased Sanju but there is no direct

overt act attributed against him and the same has been noted

in the material which were secured by the Investigating

Officer during the course of investigation relating to the case

in Crime No.129/2017. It is further contended that after

completion of investigation done by the Investigating Officer

laid the charge sheet against this accused. Whereas the co-

accused Nos.3, 4, 5, and 6 have already been released on bail

and hence those accused and this accused are in the similar

footings for the alleged offences on parity also seeking to

consider the bail petition. Moreover, the accused is ready to

abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court,

while granting bail to him. As the deceased was demanded to

repay the amount in a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- to his father

therefore the accused alleged to be hatched a plan to

eliminate the deceased and with the help of other accused,

but this theory ahs been set up in a complaint by the

complainant before the respondent police, wherein it is based

upon the complaint the crime came to be registered and

thereafter Investigating Officer has laid the charge sheet

against the accused. However, the accused do not require to

the Investigating Agency in further. It is further contended

that, since from the date of arrest the accused in judicial

custody. If the accused is kept behind the bar for a longer

period, the family member would be ruined in the society.

Therefore, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail

Per contra, the learned HCGP for the respondent-

State during the course of arguments contended that, the

charge sheet has been laid against the accused in Crime

No.129/2017, as the accused was hatched a plan to eliminate

the deceased Sanju as he was demanded to repay the amount

in a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- to his father. It is further

contended that this accused with the help of other accused

has committed the murder of deceased Sanju by infliction of

injuries over the person of deceased. The offence committed

by the accused is heinous in nature and the same has been

seen in the charge sheet which is laid against the accused, it

is consisting of statement of witnesses as well as by

conducting mahazar in the presence of pancha witness and

so also the post mortem report reveals that the infliction of

injuries over the person of deceased Sanju. Therefore, the

accused do not deserve bail and if the accused is supposed to

be released on bail certainly he would come in the way of

prosecution and destroy the evidence. On all these grounds,

the learned HCGP is seeking for rejection of the bail petition.

Having regard to the contentions taken by the

learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned HCGP

for the respondent-State are concerned, relating to the charge

sheet laid against the accused in Crime No.129/2017 alleging

that the accused were hatched a plan to eliminate the

deceased Sanju. However, on careful perusal of the

investigation papers it is seen that there was enmity between

the accused No.1 and deceased, relating to the repayment of

Rs.11,50,000/- which is borrowed by the first accused from

his father. According, to the prosecution, in this background,

the accused, with a view to eliminate the deceased committed

the murder of deceased Sanju with the help of other accused

by hatching a plan. It is relevant to state CW.17 and CW.19,

who have given the statement before the Investigating Officer

during the course of investigation which reveals that the

deceased Sanju was in the company of the accused much

prior to his death. During the course of investigation,

accused Nos.2 and 3 were apprehended and as per their

voluntary statement recorded by the Investigating Officer,

which is based upon the voluntary statement, this accused

was also roped in the alleged crime that the accused was also

participated to assault the deceased and eliminated him by

infliction of injuries. Subsequent to the registration of the

crime the Investigating Officer has laid the charge sheet

against the accused, it is consisting of statement of witnesses

as well as mahazar which alleged to be conducted by the

Investigating Officer in the presence of pancha witness.

However, the co-accused have already been granted bail by

this Court in Crl.P No.101493/2017 & Crl.P.No.101205/2017

C/w 101245/2017 & 101246/2017 by imposing suitable

conditions as specified therein relating to the accused Nos.3,

4, 5, and 6. Therefore, at this stage it is said that it does not

require any detail discussion while considering the bail

petition filed by the petitioner, as there are substance in the

contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking

for the relief of bail.

Whereas, the learned HCGP submits that, if the

accused is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would

come in the way of prosecution case and destroy the evidence.

This apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP could be

curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard

the interest of the prosecution. Therefore, for the aforesaid

reasons and as well as the circumstances of the case, I am of

the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves for grant

of bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section

439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed subject to the following

conditions:

(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with likesum surety to the satisfaction of

the concerned trial Court, where the case in Crime No.129/2017 is pending.

(2) The petitioner shall not tamper or hamper the case of prosecution witnesses.

(3) The petitioner shall appear before the Court on all the dates of hearing without fail.

(4) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the concerned SHO once in a month i.e. first week of Sunday as per the English monthly calendar in between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. for a period of three months.

(5) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Bagalkot District, without prior permission from the competent Court of law.

(6) The petitioner shall not indulge with any criminal activities henceforth.

If the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the

bail order shall automatically stands ceased.