Allowed

Prakash S/O Mahadevappa Meti v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Jun 2023CRL.P/100915/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail petition of two accused charged with murder and criminal conspiracy. Holding that custodial investigation was not required post-charge sheet, the Court ordered release subject to a personal bond, attendance conditions, and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with two sureties, subject to conditions of non-tampering with witnesses and monthly police station attendance.

Prakash S/O Mahadevappa Meti Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100915 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

PRAKASH S/O MAHADEVAPPAMETI AGE:34 YEARS OCC: HELPER IN MEDICAL SHOP R/O RAYANAL VILLAGE TQ. HUBBALLI DISTRICT DHARWAD.

¶8

YALLAPPA S/O BASAPPAMETI AGE: 59 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O RAYANAL VILLAGE TQ. HUBBALLI DISTRICT DHARWAD.

¶9

…PETITIONERS

¶10

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2023.06.29 16:16:34 +0530

¶11

(BY SRI S S YADRAMI SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI B.G INDI, ADVOCATE- P/H)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CID POLICE, H AND B WING CID HEAD QUARTERS BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI V M BANAKAR, ADDITIONAL SPP SRI SURESH S SHETTEMMANAVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶16

2 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND ORDER TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos. 10 AND 11 ON BAIL IN OLD HUBBALLI PS CRIME No.110/2022 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 109, 114, 143, 147, 148, 120(B), 341 AND 302 R/W 149 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD SITTING AT HUBBALLI.

¶18

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING AT BENGALURU, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This petition is filed by accused Nos. 10 and 11 under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail in crime No. 110/2022 of Old Hubballi Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 114, 143, 147, 148, 120(B), 341, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC.

¶21

Case of the prosecution is that, one Sanjay S/o Shivaji Patadari of Gangivala village has filed a complaint stating that about 1-½ years ago, his brother Deepak Patadari was elected as a member of Gangivala Grama Panchayath. His elder brother by name Deepak Patadari was carrying on good work to his village. His brother Deepak had love affair with one girl of Meti family and had married her

¶22

3 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶23

sometime back. About 15 days prior to filing of the complaint, no confidence resolution was moved against the President and Vice President of Rayanal Grama Panchayath. When his brother Deepak Patadari (deceased) was in his house, one Basavaraj Maradagi (accused No.8) of Rayanal village came along with complainant on complainant's motorcycle to his village and he has introduced Basavaraj Maradagi to his elder brother i.e, Deepak Patidar and went inside his house. It is further stated that on 04.07.2022 till 10.00 p.m, complainant's brother Deepak and Basavaraj Maradagi were sitting in his house discussing regarding panchayath office and at about 10.15 p.m, the Basavaraj requested his brother that he wants to go back to his village Rayanal and he has no motorcycle and hence, requested complainant's brother to drop him to his village Rayanal, for which his brother agreed and went on his bullet motorcycle along with Basavaraj Maradagi to drop him to his village. It is further stated that in night at about 10.30 p.m, when complainant was at his home, his brother's friends Paramananda Shyamgundi and Rudrappa Shettenagouda

¶24

4 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶25

telephoned him and told that all the petitioners and other persons have assaulted his brother Deepak Patadari with sword and knife and asked him to come urgently. Immediately, when complainant and his friend Arun Balad reached Rayanal village, Paramananda Shyamgundi and Gurunath Chandaragi had taken the injured to KIMS hospital, Hubballi and admitted him in KIMS hospital, Hubballi on 04.07.2022 at about 11.30 p.m, for treatment. The complainant enquired the Doctor who told that he is not in a condition to speak and his brother thereafter succumbed to the injuries on 05.07.2022 at about 02.40 a.m. Thereafter, the complainant enquiring with the elders went to the Police Station and lodged the complaint. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No. 110/2022 of Old Hubballi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC.

¶26

During investigation petitioner No. 1 – accused No. 10 came to be arrested on 11.07.2022 and petitioner No. 2

¶27

– accused No. 11 came to be arrested on 06.07.2022 and

¶28

5 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶29

they are in judicial custody. Earlier, they approached this Court as their bail petitions were rejected by the Sessions Court and their petitions came to be rejected by this Court by order dated 16.09.2022 as investigation was in progress and role of the petitioners has to be ascertained after filing of the charge sheet. Thereafter, petitioner No. 1 along with two others filed Crl.Misc. No. 5947/2022 and petitioner No.2 filed Crl.Misc. No. 5499/2022 with three others and they came to be rejected by common order dated 02.11.2022. Therefore, petitioners are before this Court seeking bail.

¶30

Heard learned Senior counsel for petitioners and learned Additional SPP for respondent State. Learned Additional SPP is assisted by Sri. Suresh S. Shettemmanavar, learned counsel for complainant.

¶31

Learned senior counsel for petitioners would contend that on a reading of column No. 17 of the charge sheet it is clear that no specific overt acts are alleged against these petitioners. He contends that even the eye

¶32

6 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶33

witnesses, namely, C.W.6 to C.W.14 and C.W.18 to C.W.24 have not stated the presence of petitioner No. 1 – accused No. 10. But, C.W.18 to C.W.24 have stated about the presence of petitioner No. 2 – accused No. 11, but no overt act is alleged against him. It is his further submission that as charge sheet is filed, petitioners are not required for custodial investigation. The accusations made against the petitioners is instigating the other accused to assault the deceased. With this he prayed to allow the petition.

¶34

Per contra learned Additional SPP would contend that the petitioners were present at the time of the incident and they are involved in a conspiracy to commit the murder of the deceased. Presence of petitioner No. 2 - accused No. 11 has been stated by the eye witnesses even though no overt act is alleged. Petitioners were members of an unlawful assembly and they conspired to commit the murder of the deceased. Petitioners instigated the other accused to assault the deceased. Charge sheet material show prima

¶35

7 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶36

facie case against them for the offence alleged against them.

¶37

With this he prayed to reject the petition.

¶38

Having regard to the submission made by learned Senior counsel for petitioners and learned Additional SPP for respondent - State, this Court has gone through the charge sheet records.

¶39

Earlier the petitions filed by these petitioners seeking bail came to be rejected by this Court on the ground that investigation was in progress and what is the role of these petitioners is to be ascertained after filing of the charge sheet. Now charge sheet has been filed. On perusal of column No. 17 of the charge sheet the accusations against the petitioners is that they have conspired with other accused to kill the deceased and they were members of an unlawful assembly and have instigated the other accused to assault the deceased. No overt act of assault by these petitioners is alleged. Even though the presence of these petitioners is stated by the witnesses at the spot, there is

¶40

8 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶41

no overt acts of assault by these petitioners on the deceased. These petitioners are in custody since 11.07.2022 and 06.07.2022 respectively and as charge sheet is filed they are not required for custodial investigation. The main apprehension of the prosecution is that if the petitioners are granted bail there is threat to the prosecution witnesses and the same can be met with by imposing stringent conditions.

¶42

In the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶43

petitioners have made out a case for grant of bail to them with conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following;

¶44

O R D E R

¶45

Petition is allowed. Petitioners – accused Nos. 10 and 11 are ordered to be released on bail in crime No. 110/2022 of Old Hubballi Police Station subject to the following conditions:

¶46

Petitioners – accused Nos. 10 and 11 shall

¶47

execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each

¶48

9 - CRL.P No. 100915 of 2023

¶49

with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶50

Petitioners – accused Nos. 10 and 11 shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.

¶51

Petitioners – accused Nos. 10 and 11 shall attend the Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted by the Court and cooperate in speedy disposal of the case.

¶52

Petitioners – accused Nos. 10 and 11 shall mark their attendance in the jurisdictional Police station on first Sunday of every month till disposal of the case registered against them.

¶53

Sd/JUDGE

¶54

LRS

¶55

List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1

Prakash S/O Mahadevappa Meti v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash S/O Mahadevappa Meti 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

Smt Munilakshmamma Vs Narayanaswamy

Mahadevaiah S/O Late Nagappa Vs Sannaramaiah S/O Late Sannaramaiah

The State of Karnataka Vs Krishnappa

M.C. Naveen Kumar Vs R.S. Siddegowda

Rajamma Vs Basamma

Sri T S Rajashekar Vs Sri N Venkatasubba Shetty