Allowed

Shri Bhujang S/O Tukaram Jadhav v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Jul 2024CRL.P/101809/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail petition under Section 439 CrPC by accused No.2 in a kidnapping-for-ransom case registered on a complaint of two kidnappings and demand of Rs.15 lakh. Noting the delay in lodging the complaint, the court granted bail with a Rs.1 lakh bond and conditions against tampering with witnesses.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shri Bhujang S/O Tukaram Jadhav Vs the State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9649 CRL.P No. 101809 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101809 OF 2024 (439)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI. BHUJANG S/O. TUKARAM JADHAV, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O:KANADAL, TALUKA: RAIBAG NOW AT SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: KAGWAD, DIST. BELAGAVI-591223 (BY SRI. R. S. GUDODAGI, ADVOCATE)

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HARUGERI P.S. REPRESENTED BY HCGP, HIGH COURT OF DHARWAD.

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYVARA, HCGP)

¶14

CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI

¶15

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING THAT THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 THAT MAY BE ORDERED TO BE RELEASED ON BAIL IN HARUGERI P.S. CRIME NO. 26/2023 CASE IS PENDING BEFORE THE VII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI, SITTING AT CHIKKODI IN S.C.NO. 5069/2023. FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 143, 147, 148, 120(B), 363, 364(A), 344, 323, 324, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC.

¶17

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

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9649 CRL.P No. 101809 of 2024

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Heard Sri. R.S. Gudodagi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State.

¶21

The petitioner herein is the accused No.2 seeking regular bail in Crime No.26/2023 wherein the respondent/police have registered a case against the petitioner for the offences u/sec.143, 147, 148, 120-B, 363, 364-A, 344, 323, 324 and 506 r/w 149 of IPC.

¶22

Brief facts of the case are as under:

¶23

It is the case of the prosecution that Smt. Shantavva Bhupal Ajure lodged a complaint stating that on 23.09.2022 when her husband was sleeping in his house, petitioner herein and five others kidnapped her husband and he was released by them without any issues. Again, on 30.01.2023, when she and her husband were coming from the temple, her husband was again kidnapped by them. They extracted money from her to

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9649 CRL.P No. 101809 of 2024

¶25

release her husband. On 09.02.2023, she stated to have given amount of Rs.15,00,000/- as they demanded.

¶26

The accused No.1-Vasudev Sahadev Naik had promised her that he would release her husband after receiving Rs.15,00,000/-. However, inspite of paying the said amount, her husband was not released. When she asked to release her husband, again she was demanded to give another Rs.30,00,000/-. Being aggrieved by the same, she lodged a complaint against accused No.1 and others. The jurisdictional police after receiving the complaint registered a case in Crime No.26/2023 for the offences stated supra.

¶27

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is innocent of the alleged offences. In fact, the complainant herself stated in her complaint that though the petitioner herein kidnapped her husband on 23.09.2022 and again on 30.01.2023, however, she lodged a complaint on 11.02.2023 which is

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9649 CRL.P No. 101809 of 2024

¶29

unbelievable and moreover, the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 and nothing has been recovered at his instance.

¶30

It is further submitted that though the complainant made several allegations against the petitioner stating that he had demanded Rs.15,00,000/from her and received the same, there is no evidence to show that she paid Rs.15,00,000/- to the petitioner. The allegations made against the petitioner are baseless and bald and moreover, the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the complainant. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶31

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently opposed the bail petition and submitted that the accused No.1 being a prime person of the association, he has committed heinous offence like kidnapping and for ransom. If the petitioner is enlarged on

¶32

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9649 CRL.P No. 101809 of 2024

¶33

bail, there may be chances of committing similar offences. Therefore, he is not entitled for bail. Making such submission, the learned HCGP prays to dismiss the petition.

¶34

Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the charge sheet, it appears that the husband of the complainant was kidnapped by the petitioner and five others on 23.09.2022. Again, her husband was kidnapped by them on 30.01.2023. However, she lodged a complaint against the petitioner and others on 11.02.2023.

¶35

Having considered the delay in lodging the complaint and also the manner in which the said complaint was lodged, it is appropriate to grant him bail by imposing suitable conditions.

¶36

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:-

¶37

ORDER

¶38

The petition is allowed.

¶39

¶40

NC: 2024:KHC-D:9649 CRL.P No. 101809 of 2024

¶41

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.26/2023 of Harugeri Police Station, on executing 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 police and also the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:-

¶42