Allowed

Prajwal @ Gunda v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jun 2022CRL.P/2292/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants regular bail to the petitioner, an accused in a murder case involving conspiracy and strangulation. The court noted the case relies on circumstantial evidence, the towel was recovered late, and other accused were already on bail, finding no reason to detain him further.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with personal bond for Rs. 2,00,000/- and two sureties for similar sum, subject to standard conditions including not tampering with witnesses.

Prajwal @ Gunda Vs State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2292/2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PRAJWAL @ GUNDA S/O VENUGOPAL AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS R/AT ANJANA NAGARA NEAR SHANIMAHATMA TEMPLE HAROHALLI CROSS BENGALORE – 560 091 …PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI PANDURANGA G, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY DODDABALLAPURA POLICE REPRESENTED BY S.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001 …RESPONDENT

¶12

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.275/2020 OF DODDABALLAPURA RURAL POLICE STATION, BENGALURU REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 107, 109, 143, 147, 148, 302, 201 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC COURT, DODDABALLAPURA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT IN C.C.NO.16/2021.

¶14

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

¶15

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking

¶18

regular bail to the petitioner in Crime No.275/2020 of Doddaballapura Rural Police Station, Bengaluru registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 107, 109, 143, 147, 148, 302, 201 read with Section 149 of IPC.

¶19

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State.

¶20

The factual matrix of the case is that the deceased had illicit relationship with elder sister of accused No.1 who is a marred woman. In this background, accused No.1 the petitioner herein developed grudge against the victim and also when he was in jail, the deceased took the sister of the petitioner and kept her in the apartment. Hence, he hatched conspiracy along with other accused and committed murder by strangulation.

¶21

Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit

¶22

that accused Nos.2 to 13 have already been enlarged on bail.

¶23

¶24

Similar allegation is also made against accused No.2 and this Court has already granted bail in favour of accused No.2 in Crl.P.No.4509/2021 vide order dated 29.11.2021. This petitioner is in custody from 18.05.2021. He would also submit that the alleged incident took place on 05.10.2020. This petitioner was arrested on 18.05.2021. The recovery of the towel was made after lapse of seven months. Except, recovery of towel, no other incriminating materials are seized. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. Therefore, he prays for enlarging the petitioner on bail.

¶25

Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that the towel was recovered at the instance of this petitioner immediately after his arrest and the same was kept nearby the place of the incident. Hence, prima-facie case is made out against the petitioner and prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶26

Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and also learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State and having taken note of the allegation made, admittedly, the case is based on the

¶27

¶28

circumstantial evidence. The recovery is also after seven months of the alleged incident that too a towel. This petitioner is in custody from 18.05.2021. On the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the entire material on records and the fact that the other accused persons have been enlarged on bail, investigation is completed and the charge sheet is filed, this Court does not find any sound circumstance to further detain the petitioner in custody. Hence, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner.

¶29

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

¶30

following:

¶31

ORDER

¶32

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the

¶33

petitioner/accused shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.275/2020 (C.C.No.16/2021) of Doddaballapura Rural Police Station, Bengaluru registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 107, 109, 143, 147, 148, 302, 201 read with Section 149 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶34

¶35

(i) The petitioner shall execute his 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 jurisdictional Court.

¶36

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

¶37

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.

¶38

(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

¶40

KSR

Prajwal @ Gunda v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prajwal @ Gunda 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

Hemanth Ghop @ Jharkhand Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Kalpana Vs the State of Karnataka

Nagaraja B Vs the State of Karnataka

Anandkumar S C Vs State of Karnataka

Nagaraja K.S. @ Naga Vs the State of Karnataka

Mukthiyar @ Ummar Basha @ Ummar Mukthiyar Vs the State of Karnataka