Allowed

Lakshmidevamma v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Jul 2021CRL.P/2077/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, the High Court of Karnataka released the accused woman on personal and surety bond subject to conditions preventing witness tampering, jurisdiction departure, and trial delays due to lack of eye witnesses and circumstantial nature of the case.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety of like sum subject to conditions of not tampering with witnesses, not leaving jurisdiction, and taking trial without delay.

Lakshmidevamma Vs the State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JULY, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2077 OF 2021

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

LAKSHMIDEVAMMA W/O. LATE RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESIDENT OF JADEGONDANAHALLI, KABA HOBLI, TALUKA MADHUGIRI, TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 572 132.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI TIGADI VEERANNA GADIGEPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MADHUGIRI POLICE STATION, TALUKA MADHUGIRI, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶13

...RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.16/2021 REGISTERED BY MADHUGIRI POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 302 OF THE IPC.

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for granting regular bail in Crime No.16/2021 registered by Madhugiri Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’).

¶20

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Jayalakshmamma, the elder sister of the deceased-Ramesh, the Police registered a case in UDR No.01/2021 under Section 174 C of Cr.P.C wherein she has stated that her younger brother Ramesh was found dead in the hut situated in the land. During the investigation and after post mortem examination, it was revealed that the deceased-Ramesh was met with Homicidal death. During the investigation, the Police arrested this petitioner and accused No.2 and remanded them to the judicial custody

¶22

¶23

on 05.02.2021. Further case of the prosecution is that about one year back, the deceased constructed the house, at that time, accused No.2 came as mason. At that time, accused No.1 had illicit intimacy with accused No.2. The same came to the knowledge of the deceased and he objected the same, therefore, this petitioner have committed murder by smothering and dodging the head on the wall and caused injuries which leads to death. The Police after investigation filed charge-sheet.

¶24

Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of

¶25

the records, admittedly there is no eye witness to the incident and the case was initially registered as UDR under Section 174 C of Cr.P.C., The inquest panchanama was conducted. Subsequently, the Police found some scratch marks on the body of the deceased. Therefore, the Post Mortem was conducted and it was revealed that the cause of death is due to Asphyxia as a result of smothering associated with head injury. Of course, there is no head injury found in the inquest or external injuries mentioned

¶26

¶27

in the post mortem report. However, on the observations of the same, it was found subdural injuries on the head. The case is based upon circumstantial evidence and the last seen theory of this petitioner with the company of the deceased.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the statement of the children of the deceased, the deceased and petitioner-accused No.1 i.e., husband and wife used to go for work at land and petitioner return in the afternoon and the deceased did not return and the very next day he found dead in the hut and the statement of the children also not implicated this petitioner except accused No.1 having illicit relation with accused No.2. The investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. The petitioner is a woman having two daughters. Therefore without expressing any opinion regarding the merits of the case, by imposing certain conditions, if bail is granted, no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution case. Hence, I pass the following

¶29

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Accordingly, criminal petition is allowed .

¶32

The trial Court is directed to release the petitioneraccused No.1 in Crime No.16/2021 registered by Madhugiri Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶33

(i) Petitioner-accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;

¶34

(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly/ indirectly;

¶35

(iii) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction without prior permission of the trial Court;

¶36

(iv) Petitioner shall take trial without causing any delay.

¶37

SD/JUDGE

¶38

GBB

Lakshmidevamma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakshmidevamma 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

Santhosh Vs the State of Karnataka

Gopal Chatri Vs the State of Karnataka

Yallappa v Vs State of Karnataka

Kiran Vs State of Karnataka

Kishor v Patel Vs State of Karnataka

Govindaraju Vs State of Karnataka