Dismissed

Yallappa Shrimant Kale v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2023CRL.P/101958/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected a bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by an accused in a compound offence case involving murder and atrocities. The plea was dismissed due to the petitioner's conduct of absconding, previous escape from custody, and lack of evidence supporting his COVID-19 claims.

What did the court decide?

Petition for bail u/sec. 439 Cr.P.C. rejected.

Yallappa Shrimant Kale Vs the State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10119 CRL.P No. 101958 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101958 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

YALLAPPA SHRIMANT KALE, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O KURAGUTA MADDIVASTHI, TQ: NORTH SOLAPUR, DIST: SOLAPUR 413007, STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SMT.POOJA RAJSHEKAR SAVADATTI, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

CHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANI Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANIDate: 2023.09.0815:00:37 +0530

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, (RAIBAG POLICE STATION) R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD 580011.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SMT.GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PRESENT PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.14 ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.5046/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF COURT OF VII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JDUGE, BELAGAVI, SITTING AT CHIKKODI IN CONNECTION WITH C.C.NO.321/2012 OF RAIBAG P.S. CRIME NO.82/2012, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 143, 147, 148, 307, 341, 324, 326, 427, 120B, 109, 201 R/W SEC. 149 OF IPC AND SEC. 25(1) 27 OF INDIAN ARMS ACT, 1959..

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10119 CRL.P No. 101958 of 2023

¶18

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

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Petitioner, who is a arraigned as accused No.14 has filed this petition u/sec.439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.) to release him on bail in S.C.No.5046/2021 on the file of VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, sitting at Chikkodi, in C.C.No.321/2012 of Raibag Police Station for the offences punishable u/sec.143, 147, 148, 307, 341, 324, 326, 427, 120B, 109, 201 r/w Section 149 IPC and Sections 25(1) and 27 of Indian Arms Act, 1959.

¶21

In support of the petition, petitioner has contended that he is innocent, law abiding citizen and has not committed the alleged offences. The concerned police have filed charge sheet and therefore the custodial presence of petitioner is not required. He has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Petition No.11579/2012. Accordingly, he participated in the trial

¶22

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10119 CRL.P No. 101958 of 2023

¶23

¶24

from 2013 to 2020. However, due to Covid-19 pandemic, he was not able to attend the court. During the second lock down, he was severely ill due to Covid-19. Petitioner is the only earning member of the family consisting of two minor children and aged parents. Due to his absence, they are suffering. He was not aware of the case being split up and separate case registered against him in S.C.No.5046/2021 and that in the said case, he has been arraigned as accused No.1. Immediately after he came to know about it, he surrendered and remanded to judicial custody. Petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed and prays to allow the petition.

¶25

Learned HCGP submitted their oral objections stating that based on the complaint filed by one Sadashiva Siddappa Dange, case in crime No.82/2012 came to be registered for the offences punishable u/sec.143, 147, 148, 307, 341, 324, 326, 427, 120B, 109, 201 r/w Section 149 IPC and Sections 25(1) and 27 of Indian Arms Act,

¶26

¶27

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10119 CRL.P No. 101958 of 2023

¶28

1959 and after completing detailed investigation, charge sheet was filed. In the said case petitioner is accused No.14. He secured bail in Criminal Petition No.11579/2012. Though till 2020 petitioner was regularly attending the court, later on he remained absent. Though non-bailable warrants were issued through PSI, Police inspector, Dy.S.P., Superintendent of Police, it could not be executed. Even the trial court tried to secure his presence by issuing NBW through jurisdictional Inspector General of Police and also S.P., Solapur, but failed.

¶29

3.1 When no longer he could dodge the police, the petitioner surrendered and he was taken to judicial custody. On account of his continuous absence, the trial court had to split up the case against him and separate charge sheet is filed in S.C.No.5046/2021. On account of deliberate absence of the petitioner, trial could not be proceeded with. Making false assertions, petitioner has sought for bail and rightly the trial court rejected his bail application and prays to dismiss this petition also.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10119 CRL.P No. 101958 of 2023

¶32

Heard arguments and perused the records.

¶33

Thus, Petitioner is seeking bail contending that though initially he regularly attended the court proceedings, due to Covid-19 pandemic, he remained absent and recently, he has surrendered before the court. However, the trial court has rejected his bail application. Undertaking to appear regularly, petitioner is seeking bail.

¶34

Alleging that his son-in-law Gangappa Madeva Hulihalli was murdered by one Suresha Dhareppa Mutnal and three others a complaint was filed by Sadashiva Siddappa Dange and after investigation charge sheet was filed and trial was going on against them. Alleging that the accused in that case were pressurizing Sadashiva and other witnesses not to give evidence and when they did not agree for the same, on 08.03.2012, when the witnesses in the said case were proceeding to the court to give evidence in two separate vehicles, petitioner and others attacked their vehicle and indiscriminately fired shots. In the said incident several of the inmates were

¶35

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10119 CRL.P No. 101958 of 2023

¶36

injured. In respect of the said incident, Sadashiva Dange launched complaint. After detailed investigation charge sheet came to be filed against all the accused including the petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.14. Petitioner secured bail in Criminal Petition No.11579/2012. After committal the petitioner and other accused are tried in S.C.No.79/2013.

¶37

Though initially petitioner attended the court regularly, since 2020 he remained absconded. After trying its level best, the trial court split up the case against the petitioner and a separate case in S.C.No.5046/2021 came to be registered against him. From the order passed by the trial court, rejecting the bail application filed by the petitioner, it is evident that the trial court has issued NBW against the petitioner through PSI, Police Inspector, Dy.S.P., Superintendent of Police, the jurisdictional Inspector General of Police and also through the Superintendent of Police, Solapur. Despite all these efforts, the trial court could not secure his presence.

¶38

¶39

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10119 CRL.P No. 101958 of 2023

¶40

It is pertinent to note that in the case in

¶41

question, there are several accused and all of them are attending the trial regularly. Such being the case, at any stretch of imagination, it cannot be accepted that petitioner could not know the hearing date on account of miscommunication. As rightly observed by the trial court, to show that he was suffering from Covid, petitioner has not produced any evidence. Even if it is accepted that he was suffering from ill health, there was no impediment for him to instruct his counsel to seek exemption.

¶42

From the manner in which the petitioner has conducted himself, this court has no hesitation to call that hold that intentionally petitioner has remained absconding. It is stated in the order passed by the trial court rejecting the bail petition of the petitioner that on 21.6.2012, while the petitioner was being brought to the Raibag Court from Central Prison, Belagavi, he escaped from the custody and in that connection in Crime No.166/2012 was filed against him. Only after it became impossible for him to evade the

¶43

8 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10119 CRL.P No. 101958 of 2023

¶44

process of the court, he has surrendered to the court. Taking into consideration the conduct of the petitioner and the fact of he violating and misusing the liberty granted to him, the trial court has rightly rejected the bail application filed by the petitioner. This Court also does not find any justifiable grounds to differ from the order passed by the trial court. In the result, the petition fails and accordingly the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

Petition filed by the petitioner under Section

¶47

439 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.

¶48

CLK

¶49

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17

¶50

Sd/JUDGE

Yallappa Shrimant Kale v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yallappa Shrimant Kale 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. Mahadev S/O. Basappa Savadi Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr. Janappa S/O Raju Koujalagi Alias Girennavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Karinagappa S/O Gundumunagu Sannirappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Prasad S/O Irrappa Hamapannavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Appasab S/O Balappa Sanadi Vs the State of Karnataka

Durgaraj S/O Kallappa Arasanal Vs the State of Karnataka