Allowed

Sri Vinodha R v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Aug 2023CRL.A/1191/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal by accused No.2 against rejection of bail in murder case. Court allowed appeal, set aside rejection, and granted bail on bond and surrender conditions, noting death due to throttling not attributed to appellant.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond for Rs.1,00,000 with one surety, subject to attending court hearings and not tampering with witnesses or committing similar offences.

Sri Vinodha R Vs State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1191 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI VINODHA R S/O RAMACHANDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/O AVALAIAHAINAPALYA SASALU HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 561 204.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI SRINIVAS N, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA KORATAGERE POLICE STATION TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 572 129 REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶13

HANUMANTHARAYA S/O LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDENT OF DURGANAHALLI VILLAGE DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 561 204.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI M DIWAKAR MADDUR, HCGP FOR R1 R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶16

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.05.2023 PASSED

¶17

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶18

BY THE HON’BLE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU IN CRL.MISC.No.408/2023 NOW PENDING IN SPECIAL CASE No.262/2023 (CR.No.297/2022) FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302, 201, 109 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(VA) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PENDING FOR TRIAL.

¶19

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

This appeal is by accused No.2 praying to set-aside the order dated 04.05.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.No.408/2023 by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, whereunder, the bail petition of this appellant – accused No.2 sought in respect of Crime No.297/2022 of Koratagere Police Station, now pending in Spl.Case No.262/2023 for the offences under Sections 302, 201, 109 r/w Section 34 of IPC (for short hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and Sections 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), came to be rejected.

¶22

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

¶24

High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State.

¶25

Inspite of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent

¶26

and unrepresented.

¶27

As per the charge sheet, case of the prosecution is that accused No.5 - wife of the deceased Sri.Suresh had an illicit relationship with accused No.1. As a result of that there was mis-understanding between the deceased with accused No.5. Due to ill treatment by the deceased, accused No.5 had been to her relative’s house who is none other than accused No.6 – Smt.Channamma and started residing in Nayakara Pete village. In that house also, the deceased Sri.Suresh picked up quarrel with accused No.5. Due to ill treatment by the deceased Sri.Suresh, both accused Nos.5 and 6 informed accused No.1 to commit the murder of Sri.Suresh, agreeing to pay him Rs.20,000/-. At

¶28

the instigation of accused No.1, on 28.11.2022, accused Nos.2 to 4 received a sum of Rs.5,000/- from accused No.5.

¶29

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶30

On the same day, at about 4.30 pm., accused No.1 in his Auto along with accused No.2 had been to Tubugere village and took up the deceased Sri.Suresh in his Auto, then went to bye-pass road on Madhugiri at 9.40 pm. By that time, accused Nos.3 and 4 came there on their two wheeler. All of them had alcohol at Madhugiri Wines and all of them along with the deceased Sri.Suresh had been to the vacant place belonging to one Jodidar Rajanna. Accused No.1 to 4 made the deceased Sri.Suresh to sleep in the Auto and also pulled his head out side the Auto. Immediately, accused No.2 kicked with leg on his face and accused No.3 squeezed the neck of the deceased Sri.Suresh with an intention to commit his murder. After death of the deceased Sri.Suresh, accused Nos.1 to 3 shifted the dead body of the deceased to the land belonging to Sri.Krishnamurthy (CW-8) at Basavanahalli village and cremated the dead body in that land. It is the further case of the prosecution that accused Nos.1 to 4 after committing the murder of Sri.Suresh, took the dead body to the house of accused No.5 and shown the dead body to her. Accused No.5

¶31

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶32

provided a window curtain to cover the dead body and one spade to burry the dead body. The appellant – accused No.2 who has been arrested on 12.12.2022 and who is in judicial custody filed bail application and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order.

¶33

Learned counsel for the appellant – accused No.2 would contend that the case has been registered on the suo moto complaint of the Police Sub-Inspector on the intimation given by CW8. CW8 stated to have received the phone call from accused No.1 who has told him regarding the murder. The entire case of the prosecution is based on the circumstantial evidence. As per the case of the prosecution CWs.6 and 7 have last seen the deceased with accused No.1 in his Auto with another person. CW10 – Cashier of Madhurigi Wines has seen accused No.3 and three to four others on 28.11.2022. The motor cycle has been recovered at the instance of accused Nos.3 and 4 under mahazar. Accused Nos.1 and 2 have shown the spot where blood stains were found which were seized under

¶34

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶35

mahazar. There are recovery of mobile phones of accused Nos.1 to 3 and the spade at the instance of accused No.1.

¶36

He further argued that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the circumstantial evidence and the prosecution has to prove each of the circumstances to establish the guilt of the appellant – accused No.2. As per the case of the prosecution, the only allegation against this appellant – accused No.2 is that he kicked on the face of the deceased. As per the postmortem report, the death of the deceased is as a result of throttling and not because of any injuries over the face. The said allegation of throttling is as against accused No.3. As the charge sheet is filed, appellant – accused No.2 is not required for the custodial interrogation. Without considering all these aspects, learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order which requires interference by this court. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal and grant bail to accused No.2.

¶37

Per contra , learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that there is a specific overt-act alleged

¶38

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶39

against this appellant – accused No.2 that he kicked on the face of the deceased and the postmortem report reveal that

¶40

there were two injuries on the face of the deceased Sri.Suresh. This appellant – accused No.2 assisted the other accused in shifting the dead body and burying it in the land of CW8. CWs.6 and 7 have last sent the deceased with accused No.1 in his Auto with another person. Even CW10 has seen accused No.1 with three to four others in Madhugiri Wines on 21.11.2022. The statement of CW8 has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Accused Nos.1 to 4 have shown the spot stating that they have buried the dead body there and the dead body was found in that place. There is recovery of blood stained clothes at the instance of accused No.1 and examination of FSL report reveal that they are stained with ‘B’ group blood. The postmortem report reveal that there are seven injuries and the death was due to throttling. The charge sheet material show prima facie case against accused No.2. Considering all these aspects, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly

¶41

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶42

rejected the bail petition. With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.

¶43

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned High Court Government Pleader, the Court has perused the charge sheet material and the impugned order.

¶44

As per the charge sheet, the overt-act alleged against this appellant – accused No.2 is that he kicked on the face of the deceased Sri.Suresh. The postmortem report reveal that the death of the deceased Suresh is due to throttling. There is no accusation against this appellant – accused No.2

¶45

of throttling. The said over-act of throttling is against accused No.3. The dead body of the deceased Sri.Suresh has been exhumed from the spot as shown by accused persons. There is recovery of blood stained clothes from this appellant – accused No.2. There are no eye witnesses to the incident. The case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has to establish each of the circumstances to establish the guilt of the accused. As the charge sheet is filed, appellant – accused

¶46

9 - NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶47

No.2 is not required for custodial interrogation. Without considering all these aspects, the Sessions Court has passed the impugned order which requires interference by this Court. In the result, the following;

¶48

ORDER

¶49

The appeal filed by the appellant – accused No.2 is allowed . The impugned order dated 04.05.2023 passed by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru in Crl.Misc.No.408/2023 is set-aside. The appellant – accused No.2 is granted bail in Crime No.297/2022 of Koratagere Police Station (pending in Spl.Case No.262/2023), subject to following conditions:

¶50

(i) The appellant – accused No.2 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/(Rupees one lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶51

(ii) The appellant – accused No.2 shall attend the Court on all hearing dates unless exempted and co-operate with the speedy trial of the case.

¶52

10 -

¶53

NC: 2023:KHC:30433 CRL.A No. 1191 of 2023

¶54

(iii) The appellant – accused No.2 shall not involve in commission of any similar offence.

¶55

(iv) The appellant – accused No.2 shall not tamper prosecution witnesses.

¶56

Sd/JUDGE

¶57

GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

Sri Vinodha R v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vinodha R 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

K Dhanush Vs the State of Karnataka

Elumalai Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ashok N Pai Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Dhanalakshmi @ Thanuja Vs Mr M N Yadiyurappa @ Chandru

Dr C B Murthy @ Chingategere Basappa Murthy Vs Sri C R Vishwaprakash

Rakesh. M @ Gunda Vs State of Karnataka