Allowed

Smt Kalpana v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Jun 2022CRL.P/1857/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to two petitioners accused of offences under Sections 323, 324, 448, 504, 506(B) read with Section 34 IPC, subject to surrender, bond, surety, and non-tampering conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's criminal petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. allowed with release on bail upon arrest if summoned for the said offences.

Smt Kalpana Vs the State of Karnataka — Anticipatory Bail | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1857/2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT KALPANA

¶9

W/O H S NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/OF HALUKURIKE, HONNAVALLI (HO) TIPTUR TAUK,

¶10

TUMKUR DISTRICT-572201

¶11

SMT K S BASAMMA W/O H S MALLESH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

¶12

R/OF NEAR VEERABHADRESHWARA TEMPLE, HALUKURIKE HONNAVALLI (HO) TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572201

¶13

... PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI.A.N.RADHA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HONNAVALLI POLICE,

¶17

¶18

REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU-560001.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SRI.MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.91/2021 OF HONNAVALLI P.S., TUMAKURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323,324,302,448,504,506-B R/W SEC.34 OF IPC WHICH IS PENDING ON FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C, TIPTUR IN C.C.No.9256/2021.

¶22

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

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 4 on bail, in the event of their arrest in respect of Crime No.91/2021 registered by the Honnavalli Police Station, Tumakuru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 448, 504, 506 (B) read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶25

¶26

The factual matrix of the case of the

¶27

prosecution is that on 26.07.2021 at about 8.00 a.m., accused Nos. 1 to 4 quarrelled with CW1 in connection with land dispute and also allegation that they trespassed into the house when CW2 questioned, accused Nos.1 and 3 for having clubs in their hands inflicted injury with the club. When CW2 came to rescue accused No.1 assaulted with the club and also snatched the machete from accused No.4 and accused No.1 inflicted injury on both the legs and knee. Accused No.3 kicked CW2 and accused No.2 snatched the club from accused No.4 and inflicted injury on the head of the victim and assaulted CW2 and all of them caused the life threat to the victim.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these two petitioners were not present at the spot and they have been falsely implicated to the case. Learned counsel also brought to the notice of this Court that the history given by CW2 before the doctor, when he was taken to the hospital, he mentioned the name of only

¶29

¶30

accused Nos.1 and 2 and not mentioned the names of these two petitioners and also an allegation against these petitioners is that they abused in a filthy language and first petitioner kicked the CW2 and 2^nd petitioner abused in a filthy language. Accused No.1 snatched the club and inflicted the injury and also cause the life threat. A very case of the prosecution is doubtful with regard to the presence of these two petitioners. Apart from that, the learned counsel submits that the case and counter case are registered against each parties and investigation has been completed and charge sheet has already been filed and no prima-facie case is made out against these two petitioners and it is also submitted that these two petitioners are women folk and they have been falsely implicated to the case.

¶31

Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for the

¶32

State submits that particularly, CW2 and other eye witnesses-CW2 and 5 stated with regard to the presence

¶33

¶34

of these petitioners while assaulting the victim and there

¶35

are sufficient materials before the Court.

¶36

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP and also perused the materials on record, when injured was taken to the hospital at around 10.15 am, learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that history given by the injured-CW2 in the hospital only referred the name of accused Nos.1 and 2 and not referred the names of accused Nos.3 and 4 and only during the course of recording the statement of eye witnesses, an improvement is made that these two petitioners were also present at the time of incident. Having taken note of the wound certificate pertains to the CW2, he categorically stated that only two persons have assaulted i.e., accused Nos.1 and 2 and not referred the names of these two petitioners. When such being the case, no doubt, there are statements of alleged eye witnesses regarding presence of these two petitioners. Only allegation is against accused Nos.1 and 2

¶37

¶38

and not against these two petitioners except the allegation that abused and assaulted with their hands by these two petitioners. When taking into note of the said fact into consideration and particularly, the statement of injured himself at the first instance when he was taken to the hospital, only accused Nos.1 and 2. Hence, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the power under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioners, subject to imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:-

¶39

ORDER

¶40

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners shall be released on bail, in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.91/2021 registered by the Honnavalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 448, 504, 506 (B) read with Section 34 of IPC. , subject to the following conditions:-

¶41

(i) The petitioners shall surrender themselves before the Investigating

¶42

¶43

Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.

¶44

(ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶45

(iii) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission till the disposal of the case.

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

JS/-

Smt Kalpana v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Kalpana 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

Sri Syamdas v.H., Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Anubhav Ravendran Vs State of Karnataka

Raghu Vs State of Karnataka

Hemanth Ghop @ Jharkhand Vs State of Karnataka

Nagaraja B Vs the State of Karnataka

Amith Vs State by