Allowed

Sri Sanjeet Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Mar 2021CRL.P/1517/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court awarded bail to a petitioner-accused suffering from paralysis, skull fracture, and severe spinal injuries under Section 439 Cr.P.C., directing his release without adjudicating the merits of the underlying allegations.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to execution of personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with surety and appearing for trial without delay.

Sri Sanjeet Reddy Vs State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1517 OF 2021

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Sri. Sanjeet Reddy S/o Lokesh Reddy Aged about 27 years R/at 150, Challekere Ring Road, II Main Kalyan Nagar Bangalore – 560 043. (Now in Judicial Custody Central Prison, Bangalore)

¶9

…Petitioner

¶10

(By Sri. Hashmath Pasha, Sr. Counsel a/w Sri. Nasir Ali - Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

State of Karnataka By Hoskote Police Station Bangalore Rural District Pin-562114.

¶13

(Represented by learned State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka)

¶14

...Respondent

¶15

(By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP)

¶16

¶17

This Criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.345/2020 (C.C.No.118/2021) of Hosakote Police Station, Bangalore District which is pending in C.C.No.118/2021 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and CJM Court, Hoskote, Bangalore for offences P/U/S 302, 364, 34 of IPC.

¶18

This Criminal petition coming on for Orders , this day, the Court made the following:

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This petition is filed by petitioner - accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in Crime No.345/2020 registered by Hoskote Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Sri Prakash Bohara on 02.11.2020 alleging that his brother-in-law deceased Harish was working as security guard in the land of one Kiran Kumar – CW.11 for the last two months prior to the incident. It is alleged that the father of Accused No.1 said to have intimacy with the wife of deceased and he used to visit the house of deceased.

¶22

¶23

That on 01.11.2020, the father of Accused No.1 is said to have visited the farm land of CW.11 where the deceased was working and was in the house of the deceased till 5.30 p.m. It is alleged that this petitioner along with Accused Nos.2 to 4 followed his father and after his father went out, they approached the deceased and abducted him and assaulted and kicked him stating as to why he has allowed the father of the accused No.1 to enter into his house for having relationship with his wife. Thereafter, again brought back and dropped near the gate of Farm house of Kiran Kumar and went away. Subsequently, the wife of the deceased shifted the injured to the hospital and on the same night at 12.15 a.m. he succumbed to the injuries at MVJ Hospital, Hoskote. Thereafter the brother of the wife of the deceased lodged the complaint after knowing the same from his sister.

¶24

After receipt of the complaint, the Police arrested this petitioner and Accused Nos.2 to 4 on 04.11.2020 and they were remanded to the judicial custody. The petitioner

¶25

¶26

had approached the Sessions Court for grant of bail which was rejected. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶27

Though the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner argued on the merits of the case with regard to granting of bail on various grounds contending that there are no eye witnesses and the injuries are simple in nature, however, he restricted his arguments only in respect of medical grounds. He contended that the petitioner is said to have sustained multiple injuries due to motor vehicle accident occurred in the year 2011. The petitioner has undergone multiple surgeries and he was still under treatment when he was arrested. He has suffered head injuries resulting in skull fracture and chest injury. He has also suffered spinal injury comprising of displaced fracture of left transverse processes of C6 and C7 vertebra. He is unable to attend even the nature call and daily routines. He has taken treatment till his arrest. He has also undergone physiotherapy. Because of the arrest, he is unable to take

¶28

¶29

the treatment. Therefore, he has approached this Court for granting of bail on medical grounds.

¶30

Per contra, the learned HCGP though objected the bail petition, however he has produced the Medical Report of the Chief Medical Officer, Central Prison Hospital, Central Prison, Bengaluru.

¶31

Upon considering the documents on record and hearing the arguments on both sides and the condition of the petitioner, where he had sustained head injury and fracture of skull apart from chest injury, spinal chord injury and as per the report of the Doctor that he is completely paralysed in his left upper limb due to which he is unable to carry out his daily routine and there is severe back pain due to implants, screws in situ. The Report of the Doctor is as under:

¶32

“Currently, he is completely paralysed in his left upper limb due to which he is unable to carry out his routine. He also complains of severe back pain over the entire back bone area extending from the neck down till almost the lower end of

¶33

¶34

the spine. He is unable to lie down and sleep in view of the spinal implant (Plates and screws in situ). Also he complains of on and off headache, giddiness, heaviness and discomfort in the head with reduced vision in his left eye. Thus due to the multiple co-morbid medical and surgical conditions he is finding difficult in taking care o him-self and his daily routine chores. He requires continued physiotherapy, surgery as mentioned above and supportive care.”

¶35

Therefore, looking into the condition of the

¶36

petitioner, the Jail Authorities are looking after the daily routine of this petitioner and he is required to take higher treatment in multi-specialty hospital. It is seen from the record that previously he has taken treatment from Vikram Hospital which is a multi-specialty hospital. Though there is hospital facility available in the Prison, but looking into the multiple injuries sustained by the petitioner he has to take treatment in a routine manner. Therefore, without touching the case on merits, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail on medical grounds.

¶37

¶38

8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed .

¶39

The Committal Court/Sessions Judge is directed to release the petitioner-accused No.1, on bail in Crime No.345/2020 registered by Hoskote Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302, r/w Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:-

¶40

i) Petitioner shall execute personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with a surety for likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶41

ii) He shall take trial without causing any delay.

¶42

SD/JUDGE

¶43

DKB/-

Sri Sanjeet Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sanjeet Reddy v. 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

Sagar Deshpande Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Mohammed Sameer Basha @ Zehan Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Deekshith Vs the State of Karnataka

Harish @ Kulkul Vs State of Karnataka

Vinay @ Sentu Vs State of Karnataka

Gareld Praveen Kumar Vs Union of India