Dismissed

Sri. Selvaraj @ Budan @ Captain v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Apr 2022CRL.P/1728/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the bail petition of an accused charged with murder and conspiracy. Despite the accused absence at the crime scene, the court held that charge sheet materials alleged conspiracy, shelter provision, and prior grudge. Finding no changed circumstances following a previous dismissal, bail was denied.

What did the court decide?

Petition for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as there are no changed circumstances and clinching materials against the petitioner.

Sri. Selvaraj @ Budan @ Captain Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G. UMA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1728/2022

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

SRI. SELVARAJ @ BUDAN @ CAPTAIN S/O LATE VARADARAJ AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.6 21^ST CROSS NEAR GOVERNMENT SCHOOL EJIPURA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU-560 047.

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SMT: MELANIE SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND :

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY COTTONPET POLICE STATION BENGALURU CITY REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.

¶13

… RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI: MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.106/2021 OF COTTONPET P.S., BENGALURU CITY (S.C.NO.1256/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF LXXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 302, 201, 109, 141, 143, 144, 149 READ WITH 35 OF IPC.

¶16

¶17

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

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

Petitioner-accused No.8 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.106/2021 of Cottonpet Police Station pending on the file of LXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 302, 201, 109, 141, 143, 144, 149 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of first information lodged by the informant - Sanjay.

¶20

Heard Smt.Melanie Sebastian, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Mahesh Shetty, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State. Perused the materials placed on record.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had approached this Court by filing Criminal Petition No.6430 of 2021 seeking similar relief. The said petition came to be dismissed vide order dated 28.09.2021. At the time of considering the said application filed by the petitioner, the copy of charge sheet was not available for

¶22

¶23

consideration. Now the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet which discloses that there is no reference of the petitioner herein. Admittedly, the petitioner was not at the spot while committing the offence. The statement of CW1 discloses that the petitioner was occasionally visiting accused No.1 and he used to gather persons during election. CW4 Ravi has also casually referred to the name of the petitioner as he was also one of the conspirator to cause the death of the deceased. Except these casual reference, there is no material against the petitioner. He was apprehended on 05.07.2021 and since then he is in judicial custody. There are in all 89 witnesses cited in the charge sheet. Examination of all these witnesses will take considerably longer period of time. Since there are no clinching materials available against the petitioner for having conspired or for having committed the offences, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. He is the permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title to the petition and is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶24

¶25

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against all the accused in general and against the petitioner in particular. The petitioner is charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC. In all, 8 accused are involved in the commission of offences. The petitioner is the main conspirator along with accused No.1 and others, as a result of which, the deceased was done to death in the broad day light by assaulting with knife. It is a pre-planned murder. The contention taken by the petitioner was considered by this Court while deciding the earlier petition in Criminal Petition No.6430 of 2021 and the same came to be dismissed on merits. There are no changed circumstances to consider the similar contention and to form a different opinion. Therefore, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶26

In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶27

“Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶28

¶29

My answer to the above point is in ‘Negative’ for the

¶30

following:

¶31

R E A S O N S

¶32

It is not in dispute that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.8 and had filed Criminal Petition No.6430 of 2021 before this Court which came to be dismissed vide order dated 28.09.2021. It is contended that the charge sheet was not filed at the time of considering the earlier petition and now the charge sheet is filed by the Investigating Officer. The statements of the witnesses recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. along with the CCTV footage relied on by the prosecution are part of the charge sheet. Even though the petitioner was not physically present when the offence was committed, it is the contention of prosecution that he is one of the conspirator along with accused No.1 to cause the death of the deceased. CW4 specifically refers to the name of the petitioner herein stating that he was the conspirator and was proclaiming to cause the death of the deceased. It is also the contention of prosecution that the petitioner is not only a conspirator to cause the death of the deceased, but also

¶33

¶34

provided shelter to the assailants after commission of the offences.

¶35

It is specifically stated in the charge sheet that

¶36

the petitioner was also having ill-will and grudge against the deceased and accordingly, he conspired for causing the murder and there is reference in the charge sheet that after the commission of offences, the petitioner herein provided shelter to accused Nos.1 to 5 in a building belonging to CW50 and it is the petitioner herein who made arrangements for stay in the said building and also provided safety for them. All these materials are glaring against the petitioner which cannot be ignored at this stage. Even though it is contended that the charge sheet was not available when the earlier petition was dismissed, it is noticed that the charge sheet came to be filed on 13.09.2021 and the earlier petition came to be dismissed on 28.09.2021, wherein, there is reference to clinching materials on which the prosecution is relying. Therefore, I do not find any changed circumstances to once again consider the contention of the petitioner to form a different opinion.

¶37

¶38

It is also brought to the notice of this Court that petitioner is involved in three other similar cases. Considering all these facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Hence, the above point is answered in Negative.

¶39

The petition is dismissed.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

*bgn/-

Sri. Selvaraj @ Budan @ Captain v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Selvaraj @ Budan @ Captain 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

Ashraf Vs State by Moodabidre Police

Abhishek N @ Abhi @ Kalla Abhi Vs State of Karnataka

Balakrishna v Vs State of Karnataka

Ramanna S/O Balayya Jalahalli Vs the State

Kishore S/O Kashappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Praveen Suvarna Vs the State of Karnataka