Dismissed

Vinay @ Sentu v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Mar 2021CRL.P/888/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed two criminal petitions for bail filed under Section 439 CrPC by petitioners accused of rioting, assault, attempted murder, and dacoity. Despite the charge sheet being filed and the injured being discharged, the Court refused bail due to the terrorization of the area, involvement of habitual offenders, and risk of tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition No.888/2021 and Criminal Petition No.658/2021 are dismissed and bail is denied to the petitioners.

Vinay @ Sentu Vs State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | 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.888 of 2021

¶7

CONNECTED WITH

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION No.658 of 2021

¶9

IN CRL.P.No.888/2021

¶10

BETWEEN

¶11

VINAY @ SENTU S/O. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, RESIDING AT No.28, 8^TH CROSS, TATA SILK FARM, THAYAGARAJNAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 004.

¶12

ARAVINDA @ KARIYA S/O. LATE PETER, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, RESIDING AT No.25/1, 17^TH MAIN, RADAKRISHNA MAIN ROAD, SRINAGARA, BANGALORE – 560 050.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI AFROZ PASHA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO CHAMARAJPET POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶17

¶18

HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. S.P.P.)

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN CR.No.89/2020 (C.C.No.130/2021) OF CHAMARAJPET POLICE STATION, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 307 AND 395 READ WITH 149 OF IPC.

¶22

IN CRL.P.No.658/2021

¶23

BETWEEN HARISH @ KULKUL S/O. MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, RESIDING AT 560, 1^ST MAIN ROAD,29^TH CROSS, L.R. NAGARA, BANGALURU CITY, KARNATAKA – 560 071.

¶24

…PETITIONER

¶25

(BY SRI RAMACHANDRA M.B., ADVOCATE) AND

¶26

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHAMARAJPET POLICE STATION, BANGALORE. REPRESENTED BY THE HCGP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶27

…RESPONDENT

¶28

(BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. S.P.P.)

¶29

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.No.89/2020 (C.C.No.130/2021) OF CHAMARAJPET POLICE STATION, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCES

¶30

¶31

PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 307 AND 395 READ WITH 149 OF IPC.

¶32

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

¶33

ORDER

¶34

Criminal Petition No.888/2021 is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.2 & 3 and Criminal Petition No.658/2021 is filed by the petitioner-accused No.10 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting bail in Crime No.89/2020 registered by the Chamarajpet Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 395 and 149 of IPC.

¶35

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Shanthi, the mother of the injured, alleging that on 21.08.2020, she went out and came to the house at 11.30 p.m., When she came to the house, her son Sathish was lying in a pool of blood with injuries. She immediately shifted him to the hospital and while going to the hospital, the injured is said to have informed her that accused No.1Anil Kumar and other persons came and assaulted him. After

¶36

¶37

registering the case, the Police investigated into the matter and arrested the accused persons and on 18.09.2020, they have recovered some weapons from accused Nos.1 and 2 and produced them before the Court and remanded to judicial custody. On recording the statement of the injured, it was raveled that accused No.1 and 10 other accused persons have assaulted him and also committed dacoity of Rs.3,000/- which was kept in the Almirah. The Police after investigation filed the charge sheet. The petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 3 in Criminal Petition No.888/2021 approached the Sessions Judge for bail which came to be rejected. The petitioner-accused No.10 in Criminal Petition No.658/2021 was brought under body warrant on 09.11.2020 and was remanded to judicial custody. He also filed a bail petition before the Sessions Judge, which was also rejected. Hence, the present bail petitions.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offences and their names were not found in the FIR. They are implicated only

¶39

¶40

on the basis of the voluntary statement of accused Nos.8 and 6, even otherwise there is no overt act attributed against these petitioners. The entire allegation is against accused No.1, who assaulted the injured Sathish. Even otherwise, the injured has been discharged from the Hospital on 11.09.2020. He is out of danger. The petitioners are in custody since long. Absolutely, there is no recovery from these petitioners. Learned counsel for accused No.2 also contended that the address of accused No.2 is at 8^th Cross, Thyagarjnagar, but the Police have recovered the weapons from Srinagar. There is no connection with the address from where the weapons were seized and the address of accused No.2. The Investigation is already completed. They are not required for any further investigation except for trial. The petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed for grant of bail.

¶41

Per contra, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor objected the bail petitions and contended that the accused persons are rowdy sheeters and they are known accused in

¶42

¶43

many Police Stations. They have terrorized the area by holding weapons in their hands and causing damage to the vehicles parked on the side of the road in the night and later they went in search of Aadur Suresh and thereafter, they went to the house of Sathish, assaulted him and also committed dacoity. Thereafter, the Police have arrested them and recovered 8 longs from the houses of the accused. Though the charge sheet is filed, the injured is discharged from the hospital. Accused No.10 is having cases at Ashoknagar and Indiranagar Police Stations for the offences punishable under Section 307 of IPC in Crime No.190/2020. He is also involved in a case in K.G.Nagar in Crime No.79/2019 registered for the offence under Sections 399 and 402 of IPC. They are habitual offenders. If they are released on bail, they will again commit similar offences. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the bail petitions.

¶44

Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of the records, admittedly, the complainant Shanthi who is not an eyewitness to the incident has filed the complaint only after

¶45

¶46

coming to know about the incident from the injured while shifting him to the hospital. After admitting the injured to the hospital, the Police have recorded the statement of the injured Sathish. He has categorically stated that accused No.1 and other accused in all 11 persons came by holding longs in their hands and after causing damages to the vehicles parked on the side of the road and searching for Aadur Suresh, they came to the house of Sathish and assaulted him on his legs and other parts of his body and thereafter looted cash of Rs.3,000/- from the house. On perusal of the statement and other witnesses, Mallika and Kaniyappa have also stated that the accused came with longs in their hands in search of Aadur Suresh and they caused damage to the vehicles while come to the house of the injured. Looking to the scene of occurrence goes to show that in all 11 accused holding longs in their hands and causing damages to the vehicles parked on the side of the road went inside the house of Sathish and assaulted which is nothing but terrorizing the people residing in that area. It is seen from the record that accused No.10 is involved in other

¶47

¶48

cases registered for the offence under Section 307 of IPC at Ashoknagar and also Indiranagar Police Stations and he has been taken into custody by issuing body warrant. Accused No.2 is also involved in dacoity cases at K.G.Nagar. Though the injured was discharged from the hospital long back, but looking to the scene of occurrence, the accused persons ransacked the area by showing longs and terrorized the people and caused fear in the minds of the people residing in that area. If the petitioners are granted bail, they may tamper the prosecution witnesses and commit similar offences. Even if charge sheet is filed, that is not a ground for releasing the petitioners on bail. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for bail. Hence, the criminal petitions are dismissed.

¶49

Sd/JUDGE

¶50

Vinay @ Sentu v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay @ Sentu 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

Sri Sanjeet Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Gareld Praveen Kumar Vs Union of India