Allowed

Sagar S/O Chandrakanth Talpankar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Oct 2020CRL.P/101313/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition filed under Section 439 CrPC by two accused persons in a murder case. The court released them on bail subject to conditions, noting the absence of eye witnesses and the requirement for the prosecution to prove the offense during trial.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners accrued as accused Nos.4 and 2 released on bail subject to bond for Rs. 1,00,000, conditions regarding witnesses, address, and attendance at trial.

Sagar S/O Chandrakanth Talpankar Vs the State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2020

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶5

CRL.P.NO.101313/2020

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SAGAR S/O CHANDRAKANTH TALPANKAR AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC:ELECTRICIAN, R/O: ULAGA NEAR JANATA PLOT, HOUSE NO.235, NEAR NIRAKAR TEMPLE, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR.

¶8

2 . VINAY S/O KAMALKANTH NAIK AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, HOUSE NO.117, R/O: HINDUWADA, MALLAPUR VILLAGE, UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR.

¶9

...PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SMT. A. R. PATIL, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶13

¶14

R/BY ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, BY MALLAPUR POLICE STATION, UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR.

¶15

RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI.V.S.KALASURAMATH, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL WHO HAVE BEEN ARRAYED AS AN ACCUSED NOS.2 & 3 IN CRIME NO.13/2020 OF MALLAPUR POLICE STATION, IN SESSIONS CASE NO.28/2020, PENDING BEFORE THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302, 120(B), 201 R/W 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE.

¶18

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by accused Nos.4 and 2 respectively to enlarge them on bail in Crime No.13/2020 of Mallapur Police Station. Charge sheet has been filed

¶21

¶22

against accused Nos.1 to 4 for offences under Sections 120B, 302 r/w 34 of IPC.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the

¶24

respondent-State.

¶25

Brief facts:-

¶26

On 7/5/2020 a missing complaint was filed

¶27

by the mother of the deceased stating that her son Anuj was working initially at abroad for about two years and thereafter returned to his native village and since three years he was searching for a job. On 6/5/2020 at about 9.30 am, he went along with his friend Sagar Chandrakant (A4) and in the evening at about 4.00pm, he called from his mobile and informed her that he is going to Dandeli for about 2-3 days. On 7/5/2020 at about 9.30am, one Suraj Bandekar (A1) telephoned to her stating that on

¶28

¶29

the previous day i.e on 6/5/2020 at about 7.00pm, the deceased along with Sagar, Vinay, Roopesh Bandekar and himself went to Irapage for the purpose of fishing and in the night at about 12.30am, when they woke up they did not find Anuj, but his mobile phone, chappal and clothes were lying near the place where he was sleeping.

¶30

On the basis of above information, a man missing case was registered. The dead body of Anuj was traced on 8/5/2020 at about 9.00am, near the bank of Bolve river. Thereafter, the father of the deceased lodged a complaint against accused Nos.1 to 4 which was registered in Crime No.13/2020 under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 302, 201 r/w 34 of IPC.

¶31

¶32

The case of prosecution is that, deceased Anuj Naik was closely acquainted with the sister of accused No.1. Accused No.1 was under the impression that both of them were in an immoral relationship and thinking that deceased might spoil the life of his sister, conspired with his friends namely accused Nos.2 to 4 to commit his murder. In furtherance of their conspiracy, on 5/5/5020 all the accused in the guise of catching fish in Kali river took the deceased in a car bearing registration No.KA-30/A-0868 to the bank of Kali river. Thereafter, all of them consumed alcohol. At about 11.30pm, they took the deceased near the water in the guise of fishing and tightly held him and immersed him in water committed his murder.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner

¶34

submits that this is a case of accidental death

¶35

¶36

which has been converted into a case of murder by falsely implicating the petitioners. He submits that there is no material to connect the petitioners in the crime. He submits that the cause of death is due to drowning and there are no injuries noticed. He submits that only on suspicion, the accused are falsely implicated. Now the investigation is complete and charge sheet is filed. Further detention of the petitioner by way of punishment is not warranted. The petitioners are willing to offer sufficient surety and abide by the conditions which may be imposed. Accordingly, he seeks to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

¶37

The learned HCGP on the other hand

¶38

submits that during the course of investigation, sufficient material have been collected. CW2 and CW12 have stated about the motive for the

¶39

¶40

accused to commit the offence. He submits that the deceased was closely acquainted with the sister of accused No.1. Therefore, accused No.1 along with other accused persons have hatched a plan and took the deceased near the bank of Kali river and committed his murder by immersing him in water. He submits that CW16 and CW17 have stated regarding the deceased last seen in the company of the accused. Hence, he submits that there is a prima facie case against the petitioners and seeks to reject the petition.

¶41

The incident is said to have occurred between 6/5/2020 and 8/5/2020. There are no eye witnesses to the incident in question. According to the prosecution the deceased went along with the accused for the purpose of fishing near the bank of Kali river. Even according to

¶42

¶43

the complainant, it is the accused who informed about missing of the deceased. Dead body was traced on the next day morning. The cause of death according to post mortem report is, on account of drowning. In the post mortem report, it is mentioned that the deceased had consumed alcohol prior to his death. The accused are arrested on 8/5/2020. Whether the accused have committed the offence as alleged by the prosecution is a matter which has to be established by the prosecution during trial. Now investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioners can be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Accordingly, the following:

¶44

¶45

ORDER

¶46

a) Petition is allowed.

¶47

b) Petitioners-accused Nos.4 and 2 in Crime No.13/2020 of Mallapur Police Station, now pending in SC No.28/2020 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Uttara Kannada, for the offences under Sections 120B, 302 read with Section 34 of IPC, shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

¶48

i) The petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/each with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶49

ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly. iii) The petitioners shall furnish proof of their correct address and

¶50

¶51

shall intimate regarding change in address, if any.

¶52

iv) The petitioners shall be regular in attending the trial proceedings.

¶53

Sd/JUDGE

¶54

Vmb

Sagar S/O Chandrakanth Talpankar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagar S/O Chandrakanth Talpankar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basayya S/O Mallayya Chikkamath Vs the State of Karnataka

Hadapada Basavaraj S/O Hadapada Yerriswamy Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjunath S/O Narayana Bandekar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Akshay S/O Ashok Kammar Vs the State of Karnataka

K M Gurubasavaraj S/O Marularadhya Vs the State of Karnataka

Gutteppa S/O Bhimappa Karibheemannanavar Vs State of Karnataka