Dismissed

Jamakhandi Hanumanthappa @ J. Hanamanhappa S/O Ramappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2023CRL.P/102075/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for a murder charge. Finding the investigation incomplete with no charge sheet filed, the court held granting bail at this premature stage was unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected; petitioner is denied bail.

Jamakhandi Hanumanthappa @ J. Hanamanhappa… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10937 CRL.P No. 102075 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102075 OF 2023

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

JAMAKHANDI HANUMANTHAPPA @ J. HANAMANTHAPPA S/O RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O. HARALU VILLAGE, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DIST.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶12

CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI

¶13

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2023.09.23 16:36:51 +0530

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH PSI, CHIGATERI POLICE STATION, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD-580011.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SMT.GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.44/2023 FOR OFFENCE U/S. 302 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE CHIGATERI POLICE STATION, TQ. HARAPANAHALLI, DIST: VIJAYANAGARA NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HARAPANAHALLI.

¶18

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

¶19

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10937 CRL.P No. 102075 of 2023

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Petitioner who is the sole accused has filed this petition under section 439 Cr.P.C. to release him on bail in Crime No.44/2023 of Chigateri Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.

¶22

In support of his petition, the petitioner has contended that he has not committed the alleged offence and he is falsely implicated in the crime. The entire case of the prosecution is concocted at the behest of complainant who is a practicing advocate. There are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident. There is inordinate delay in filing the complaint and the same is not explained. The alleged motive attributed to the petitioner is concocted for the purpose of complaint. The investigation is completed and only charge sheet is left to be filed. Since 08.07.2023, petitioner is in judicial custody. He is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed and furnish substantial surety to the satisfaction of the trial court and pray to allow the petition.

¶23

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10937 CRL.P No. 102075 of 2023

¶24

Learned High Court Government Pleader

¶25

submitted oral objections stating that complainant is the cousin of diseased Siddesha. He was doing coolie by driving tractor. On 07.07.2023 at 9.00 a.m. he left the house for work after informing his brother Ravi. The friends of deceased Siddesha had spoken to him to till 11:30 a.m. Thereafter he did not pick up the phone. Even complainant called him without any reply. One Basavaraju of their village informed that the motorbike of deceased was near the Punya Nagar Cross of Mattihalli.

¶26

3.1. Complainant, Doddabasavaraj, Neelammara Chandrappa, Jayalappa, J.Suresh and others went in search of deceased and found his motorbike. About 40 meters from the said place, they found the cell phone of deceased covered in a cloth. About 50 meters from the said place, they heard moaning sound and found deceased. Immediately he was shifted to Government Hospital, Kottur. On the way to the hospital, deceased disclosed that petitioner called him to the said place and

¶27

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10937 CRL.P No. 102075 of 2023

¶28

made allegations that he is having illicit relationship with the wife of petitioner. Though he denied the said allegations petitioner was convinced and he strangulated him. He also squeezed his testicles and kicked 3-4 times on his testicles and left the place. On account of the assault, he was not able to get up. After first-aid, the doctor of Kottur Government Hospital, directed them to take Sidddesha to Davangere Hospital. They immediately took Siddesha in 108 ambulance to Harapanahalli Government Hospital. On the way to the hospital, Siddesha died. The doctor of Harapanahalli hospital examined him and declared him as dead.

¶29

3.1 Based on the complaint, case was registered and investigation is taken up. During the investigation, petitioner was arrested. The statements of the witnesses before whom deceased gave his oral dying declaration, prove the complicity of the petitioner in the crime. Investigation is yet to be completed and charge sheet is not filed and prays reject the petition.

¶30

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10937 CRL.P No. 102075 of 2023

¶31

4. Heard arguments and perused the record.

¶32

It is the specific case of the prosecution that petitioner was suspecting that deceased was having illicit relationship with his wife and in that connection on 07.07.2023, petitioner took the deceased to a land near Mattihalli and questioned him. Even though he replied that there is nothing of that sort, petitioner did not believe him and tried to strangulate him. He also kicked 3–4 times on his testicles, and also squeezed his testicles, as a result of which deceased could not get up and he fell down in the land. Only after complainant and other family members and friends came in search of deceased, they found him and his motorbike near the land and shifted him to the hospital. On the way to the hospital, deceased disclosed the assault on him by the petitioner. On the way to Davangere Hospital, deceased succumbed to the injuries.

¶33

Based on the complaint investigation is taken up. The statements of complainant and other witnesses before whom deceased has given dying declaration is

¶34

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10937 CRL.P No. 102075 of 2023

¶35

recorded. The dead body subjected to postmortem examination. The investigation so far conducted, makes out a prima facie case against the petitioner. Since the investigation is not yet completed and charge sheet is not filed, it is a premature stage to grant bail to the petitioner. For these reasons, this court is of the considered opinion that petitioner is not entitled for bail. In the result, the petition fails and accordingly the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

Petition filed U/sec.439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

CLK

¶40

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Jamakhandi Hanumanthappa @ J. Hanamanhappa S/O Ramappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamakhandi Hanumanthappa @ J. Hanamanhappa S/O Ramappa 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

Shrishail Vs State of Karnataka

Ningappa S/O Hanamanthappa Navalli Vs the State of Karnataka

Lakshmavva W/O Ramappa Chigari Vs the State of Karnataka

Ramesh S/O Venkappa Bonageri Vs the State of Karnataka

Sangayya S/O. Sharanayya Kadabalakatti Vs the State of Karnataka

Husenasab S/O Murtujsab Nadaf Vs the State of Karnataka