Allowed

Rajareddy v. the State

Karnataka HC2 Dec 2021CRL.A/1378/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal appeal filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST Act for bail in a murder case. The High Court observed the case rests on circumstantial evidence and relied on similar cases where bail was granted to co-accused. The court allowed the appeal and released appellants on bail subject to stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; appellants released on bail subject to monetary security, sureties, and conditions against witness tampering and further crimes.

Rajareddy Vs the State — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1378 OF 2021

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

RAJAREDDY

¶9

S/O. GOVINDAREDDY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

¶10

R/AT BOGENAHALLI VILLAGE GUDIBANDE TALUK

¶11

CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT–561 207.

¶12

NARASHIMAREDDY

¶13

S/O. REAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT BOGENAHALLI VILLAGE GUDIBANDE TALUK

¶14

CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT–561 207.

¶15

…APPELLANTS

¶16

(BY SRI. B.V. PINTO, FOR SRI. RAJU C.N., ADVOCATES)

¶17

AND:

¶18

THE STATE BY GUDIBANDE POLICE CHICKKABALLAPUR REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OR KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 001.

¶19

SMT. VENKATANARASAMMA W/O. VENAKTARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT GANDANAGENAHALLI VILLAGE

¶20

¶21

GUDIBANDE TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 209.

¶22

… RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. LEENA C. SHIVAPURMATH, HCGP FOR R-1. R-2 IS SERVED.)

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANTS ON BAIL IN SPL.S.C.NO.24/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE 1^ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.24/2021 OF GUDIBANDE POLICE, CHIKKABALLAPURA, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 114, 120-B AND 302 READ WITH 34 OF IPC AND 3(2)(v) AND 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING;

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

This appeal is preferred under section 14 A (2) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, by accused Nos.2 and 3, praying to set aside the order dated 04.06.2021 and to enlarge them on bail in Cr.No.24/2021 of Gudibande Police Station.

¶28

Charge sheet has been filed against accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections

¶29

¶30

114, 120(B), 302 R/w Section 34 of IPC, Section 3(2)(v)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶31

Heard both side and perused the material on record.

¶32

Respondent No.2 has been served, but there is no representation.

¶33

Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that, on account of political enmity and also for the reasons that the deceased Lakshmi Narasimhappa had availed a sum of Rs.50,000/- from accused No.2 Rajareddy, which was not returned by him, the accused persons entered into a conspiracy on 30.01.2021. At about 3.00 p.m to eliminate him and in furtherance of the said conspiracy, at the instigation of accused No.1, accused Nos.2 to 4 armed with lethal weapons, traveled in a motor cycle bearing AP-02-AY-5841 and thereafter at about 4.15 p.m., accused No.2 secured deceased and brought him near the tile factory, wherein accused Nos.3 and 4 as

¶34

¶35

well as accused No.2 assaulted him with the weapons they were carrying and committed his murder.

¶36

The entire case is based on circumstantial

¶37

evidence, as there are no eye-witnesses to the incident in question. The prosecution is relying on the recovery effected at the instance of the accused persons such as blood stained clothes, weapons and bike key.

¶38

The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that similarly placed accused Nos.1 and 4 have been enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble Court and there are no sufficient materials to connect the appellants with the alleged crime. He has contended that the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the bail petition considering the overtacts of the accused persons and also on the ground that the charge sheet has been filed against the accused and points out to the observations made by the learned Sessions Judge that C.W.3-Anand has stated that prior to the incident accused Nos.1 and 2 have traveled in a motor cycle towards the Brick Factory

¶39

¶40

and later on accused No.4 also came in a motor cycle at about 3.30 P.M and went towards Varadhaiahgaripalli village. He contends that the said circumstance is not an incriminating circumstance to implicate the accused persons, since there is no mention of deceased seen along with the accused persons. He submits that the appellants are arrested on 11.02.2021 and the charge sheet is already filed. He submits, the appellants are ready and willing to abide by any conditions. Accordingly, seeks to allow the appeal.

¶41

The learned HCGP has opposed grant of bail to the appellants contending that there are recovery of incriminating articles and motive is also spoken by the witnesses and therefore, in the event of grant of any relief to the appellants, they may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and also flee from justice.

¶42

Admittedly, there are no eye witnesses to the incident in question. The case is based on circumstantial

¶43

¶44

evidence. Material on record discloses that certain recoveries are made at the instance of the accused.

¶45

The learned Sessions Judge while dismissing

¶46

the petition has observed that filing of charge sheet prima facie supports the case of prosecution that, petitioners and other accused have committed heinous offence and if they are released on bail, there are very chances of tampering and threatening witnesses.

¶47

A co-ordinate bench of this Court in Crl.A.No.917/2021 dated 30.08.2021 and in

¶48

Crl.A.No.770/2021, dated 23.10.2021 has allowed the said appeal filed by accused Nos.1 and 4 and enlarged them on bail.

¶49

The appellants are similarly placed. Filing of the

¶50

charge sheet itself will not lead to a conclusion that the appellants are guilty of the offence alleged against them. Prosecution has to establish its case in a full fledged trial. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this

¶51

¶52

Court has allowed the appeal preferred by accused Nos.1 and 4, by imposing conditions. Hence, the appellants who are already arrested and interrogated and who are in judicial custody are also entitled for the relief they have sought. Accordingly, following;

¶53

ORDER

¶54

Appeal is allowed.

¶55

The order passed by the First Additional District and Sessions Judge at Chikkaballapura, dated 04.06.2021 in Cr.No.24/2021 of Gudibande Police Station is hereby set aside. Appellants/accused Nos.2 and 3 are ordered to be released on bail subject to following conditions::

¶56

The appellants shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each and providing two sureties each for likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶57