Dismissed

Sri Srinivasa T R v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Mar 2023CRL.A/277/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka heard an appeal seeking enlargement of bail for an appellant charged with murder and other offences. The Court dismissed the appeal, keeping open the appellant's contention that investigation was completed and a fresh petition could be filed with the Sessions Court.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed. All contentions of the appellant are kept open for a fresh petition before the Sessions Court.

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

¶1

1 - CRL.A No. 277 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 277 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI SRINIVASA T R S/O RAJANNA T.H. AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, WORKING AS COMPUTER PROGRAM OPERATOR, ON CONTRACT BASIS AT B.E.O. OFFICE, TARIKERE R/O CHOWDESHWARI COLONY, TARIKERE TOWN AND TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU.

¶9

Digitally

¶10

signed by GAYATHRI P G Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

(BY SRI. VENKATESHA T S., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

…APPELLANT

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY TARIKERE POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU, TARIKERE - 577 228 REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001.

¶15

SRI SHEKAR S/O SANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O 2ND CROSS, BIRUR ROAD, (B.H. ROAD, OPP. CHURCH) TARIKERE TOWN, TARIKERE 577 228.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI.K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1/STATE; R-2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶18

2 - CRL.A No. 277 of 2023

¶19

CRL.A. FILED U/S.14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.01.2023 IN CR.NO.253/2022 PASSED BY THE HONBLE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SENIOR JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU AND ENLARGE THE ACCUSED NO.8 (APPELLANT) ON BAIL REGISTERED VIDE CRIME NO.253/2022 IN TARIKERE POLICE STATION TARIKERE ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SPECIAL JUDGE CHIKKAMAGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.143,144,147,148,302 R/W SEC.149 OF IPC AND U/S.3(2)(va),3(2)(vii) OF SC/ST (POA) BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL.

¶20

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

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal is preferred by accused No.8 against the

¶23

order dated 02.01.2023 passed by the Court of I Additional Sessions and Special Judge, Chikkamagaluru in Crime No.253/2022, whereby the petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and

¶25

learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State.

¶26

3 - CRL.A No. 277 of 2023

¶27

3. Learned HCGP has filed a memo stating that

¶28

respondent No.2/De-facto complainant has been served.

¶29

Case in crime No.253/2022 was registered at Tarikere Town Police Station, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC on a complaint lodged by one Sri.Shekar, father of deceased-Omkar. It is alleged that on 20.11.2022 at about 6.00 pm when his deceased son was in the house, his friends namely Sunil and Vijay came to the house telling him to accompany them to discuss about some financial matters. Thereafter, at about 10.45 pm father of Sunil came and informed him that someone has assaulted his son. Immediately, he went to one Vasuda Hospital, wherein he met his relative Anand and a friend Satish, who informed that, when they were walking near APMC Godown they saw deceased Omkar along with his friends Sunil and Vijay and others. Further informed that, his son has been shifted to the Government Hospital, Tarikere. Thereafter complainant went to the said hospital

¶30

¶31

CRL.A No. 277 of 2023

¶32

and saw his son with bleeding injuries on his head. The Doctor informed that his son is no more.

¶33

It is alleged in the complaint that, there was some financial dispute between deceased Omkar and his friends namely, Sunil and Vijay and in this regard quarrel had taken place.

¶34

F.I.R. was initially registered against Sunil, Vijay and others. During the course of investigation the said accused were arrested and their voluntary statements were recorded. Further, the statement of one eye witness

¶35

namely, Sri.M.K.Pradeep Kumar was also recorded on 22.11.2022 wherein, he has stated that he has seen the accused persons quarrelling with each other at about 10.15 pm on 20.11.2022.

¶36

It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant/accused No.8 that there is no material against the appellant and he has been implicated in a false case. He contends that name of the appellant is not in the F.I.R.

¶37

5 - CRL.A No. 277 of 2023

¶38

but subsequently, he has been implicated on the voluntary

¶39

statement of the co-accused. He contends that the statement of the eye witness is recorded after an inordinate delay of two days and therefore his statement cannot be believed. He submits that the appellant is in judicial custody from 23.11.2022 and now investigation is completed and therefore by imposing any conditions the appellant may be admitted to bail.

¶40

The learned HCGP has opposed the prayer contending that, appellant along with other accused persons have committed murder and the offence alleged being punishable with death or imprisonment of life, the appellant is not entitled for bail. He contends that the learned Sessions Judge after considering the entire materials on record has rightly rejected the prayer seeking bail. Therefore, he seeks to reject the appeal.

¶41

The case of the prosecution is that, on account

¶42

of some financial dispute, accused Nos.1 and 2 with an ulterior motive, came near the house of the deceased on

¶43

¶44

CRL.A No. 277 of 2023

¶45

20.11.2022 at about 6.00 pm and took him along with them and thereafter picked up quarrel with him near APMC, Tarikere Town and assaulted him with beer bottle, brick etc, on account of which deceased sustained injuries and later died in the hospital. According to prosecution, the appellant herein has assaulted the deceased with hands and legs. As per post mortem report, death is due to shock and hemorrhage, secondary to injuries sustained over head.

¶46

The learned Sessions Judge has rejected the prayer seeking bail mainly on the ground that, the alleged incident took place in furtherance of common object of accused Nos.1 to 9 and the statement of the eye witness reveal the involvement of the accused persons. Further, the Investigating Officer in his report has stated that the release of accused persons will cause hindrance to the investigations and the investigation is pending and therefore at this stage, the accused is not entitled for bail.

¶47

¶48

CRL.A No. 277 of 2023

¶49

Now it is submitted that the investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. Hence, the appellant/accused No.8 is permitted to approach the Sessions Court by filing a fresh petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. If any such petition is filed, the same shall be disposed of by the learned Sessions Judge, without being influenced by any of the observations made herein above.

¶50

All the contentions of the appellant are kept open.

¶51

Appeal is dismissed .

¶52

Sd/JUDGE

¶53

GPG

Sri Srinivasa T R v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Srinivasa T R 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

Mohini S Uchil Vs State by Rural Police

Sri. Ashok M.C Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Govindaraju @ Govinda Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohamad Mustaf @ Auto Mohamad Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr Sanjeev Kumar Hiremath Vs State of Karnataka

The State of Karnataka Vs John Toppo