Regular bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C by accused No.3 charged with stabbing the deceased on the abdomen in a group assault over a parking quarrel. The court found a prima facie case, risk to witnesses, and no parity with accused No.1; dismissed the successive bail petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2321 CRL.P No. 103470 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103470 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SRI JAYAPPA @ BALU S/O BHAIRU NILAJAKAR AGE 52 YEARS OCC : AGRICULTURE R/O GOUNDAWAD VILLAGE – 560 009 TQ AND DIST : BELAGAVI
…PETITIONER (BY SRI C.H.JADHAV, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI NEELENDRA.D.GUNDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
VIJAYALAKSHMIM KANKUPPI Digitally signedbyVIJAYALAKSHMIM KANKUPPIDate:2024.02.2411:24:20 +0530
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KAKATI P S REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING DHARWAD 580001
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAKASHGOUDA HATTI, HCGP FOR RESPONDENT; SRI MAQBOOL M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR COMPLAINANT)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO GRANT HIM REGULAR BAIL IN THE CRIME NO.166/2022 OF KAKATI POLICE STATION, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SECTION 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 323 R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC, PENDING BEFORE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE AT BELAGAVI IN O.S.NO.237/2022.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING AT BENGALURU, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2321 CRL.P No. 103470 of 2023
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking bail in crime No.166/2022 of Kakati Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 302, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short hereinafter referred to as `IPC’).
Bhairavnath temple. It is further stated that accused No.2Aranav Anand Kutre came in his Innova car to park it near the provisional store belonging to Yadav and at that time, Yadav told the accused No.2-Aranav not to park his car near his shop since his shop is still open and further asked him to park it once the shop is closed. Due to which, said Aranav Kutre-accused No.2 picked up quarrel with him and they both started abusing each other loudly. It is further stated that on hearing the noise, accused No.1-Anand Kutre, accused No.5-Shashikala Kutre and accused No.6 Laxmi Venkat Kutre came out even the complainant came near the said provisional store along with Sonam Yadav Patil, Suman Gangaram Patil, Leela Gundu Pingat, Rekha Madhu Pawar, Roopa Bahurao Pawar and at that time, the said accused No.2-Aranav Kutre and accused No.1-Anand Kutre were quarreling with Yadav Patil in connection with parking of car. It is further submitted that the complainant and others tried to console but they did not stop quarreling. It is further stated that at that time, the other accused persons i.e, accused No.9-Venkat Kutre, accused
No.10-Siddappa Mutagekar, Accused No.11-Daulath Mutagekar, accused No.3-Jayappa Niljakar, accused No.2 Surekha Nilajakar, accused No.8-Sanjana Nilajakar, accused No.4-Mahantesh Nilajakar, accused No.15-Lakan Nilajakar, accused No.12-Vasanth Patil, accused No.13Sanjay Kutre, accused No.14-Sangeeta Kutre, accused No.16-Kedari Patil, accused No.17-Prema Patil, accused No.18-Bharath Patil, accused No.19-Maruti Patil, accused No.20-Topanna Patil, accused No.21-Gajanan Birje, accused No.22-Parashuram Mutagekar, accused No.23Kallappa Astekar, accused No.24-Mahesh Sambrekar and accused No.25-Basavanth Mutagekar together started quarreling with Yadav Patil. It is further submitted that the complainant and their association of women tried to console them again and at that time, it was about 9:00 p.m. It is further stated that at that time, the husband of complainant-Satish(deceased), S/o Rajendra Patil, also came near them and enquired and to which, the complainant revealed about the incident. At that time, her husband-Satish (deceased) told them not to fight and
further told that if they have any complaints to approach Police Station and lodge a complaint and to which, accused No.1-Anand Kutre, accused No.2-Aranav Kutre and 2 other persons picked up quarrel asking him to lodge a complaint and they would look after the consequences an it is further alleged that one Nandu Siddappa Nilajka (injured) came to console and then, said Anand-accuse No.1 and Aranavaccused No.2 started abusing Satis (deceased) stating that he would always interfere in all the matters and that he would come to educate us and later told accused No.5Shashikala to get the knife and accused No.5-Shashikala brought the knife and gave it to Anand-accused No.1. It is further alleged that later, accused No.1-Anand and other accused in anger told that let us not leave the Satish today and would kill him and at that time, accused No.1-Anand assaulted Satish with knife on his back and with the same knife, again he went to stab him at that time, the Nandu(injured) tried to stop the accused No.1-Anand to which, the accused No.1-Anand threatened him with dire consequences and caused injuries to the hands of said
Nandu(injured). It is further stated that thereafter one Jayappa Bhairu Neelajkar-accused No.3 stabbed deceased Satish with the knife which he had brought along with him by saying that let us not spare him today. It is further stated that the complainant tried to rescue her husband Satish and when she went near him, accused No.7Surekha Nilajakar and accused No.8-Sanjana Nilajakar held her hair and threw her on the ground. At that time, Sonam and Yadav together told that let us save him and asked one Umesh to bring Van of Mahesh Pingat and thereafter took him to KLE hospital and later he succumbed to injuries in the hospital. It is further stated that earlier all the accused persons together had assaulted her husband deceased Satish Patil in connection with the dispute of land of Goundwad Temple and complaint has been registered before the APMC Police Station. The said complaint came to be registered in Kakati Police Station under Crime No.166/2022 against 25 accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 307 and 323 of IPC. The police after
investigation filed charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 25 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147,
148, 323, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC.
petitioner/accused No.3 would contend that accused No.4
has been granted bail by this Court by order dated 29.08.2023 even though earlier bail petition came to be rejected by this Court by order dated 01.12.2022. He further submits that accused No.1 against whom similar overtacts are alleged has been granted bail in Crl.P.No.103208/2023 by order dated 06.12.2023. The petitioner who is similarly placed to that of accused No.1 is entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity. He contends that the petitioner has stabbed on the abdomen of the deceased and accused No.1 has stabbed on the back of the deceased. He further submits that on looking into the post-mortem, the said injury caused by accused No.1 on the back of the deceased has caused injury to the left lung and doctor opined that death is due to stab injuries sustained to chest and abdomen. He further submits that all accused who have been granted bail except this petitioner have not misused liberty granted to them. With this, he prayed to allow the petition and grant bail to the petitioner/accused No.3.
Pleader would contend that this Court in earlier bail petition considering the heinousness of offence, overtacts of this petitioner/accused No.3 and threat to eye witnesses and complainant has rejected the bail petition of the petitioner. He further submits that the Doctor who conducted the post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased has opined that cause of the death is due to stab injuries sustained to chest and abdomen. The petitioner has stabbed with knife on the abdomen of the deceased. The said injury caused the death of the deceased. On the basis of the voluntary statement, there is recovery of weapon at the instance of this petitioner/accused No.3 from his house. He further submits that accused Nos.2, 5, 6, 11 and 12 have been granted bail and they have threatened the complainant and complaint has been lodged against them and case came to be registered against them in C.C.No.2369/2023. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.
petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State, this Court has perused charge sheet records, earlier order passed by this Court and other records.
9. Accusation leveled against this
petitioner/accused No.3 is that he stabbed with knife on the stomach of the deceased. The doctor who conducted the post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased has noted that the said stab injury on the abdomen of the deceased and opined that death is due to stab injuries sustained to chest and abdomen. Accused No.1 has been granted bail by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court on the ground that he has stabbed on the back
of the deceased and the post-mortem report clearly indicates that cause of the death is due to stab injuries sustained to chest and abdomen. The learned Senior counsel has contended that the said stab on the back of the deceased has penetrated into left lung of the
deceased. The said aspect has not been put forth before the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court has only considered that accused No.1 has stabbed on the back and as per opinion of the Doctor death is due to stab injuries sustained to chest and abdomen. This petitioner has stabbed on the abdomen of the deceased. Serious overtact alleged against this petitioner/accused No.3 is that he stabbed with knife on the abdomen of the deceased. On perusal of the entire charge sheet materials there is prima facie case against this petitioner/accused No.3 for offence alleged against him. If the petitioner/accused No.3 is granted bail, there is threat to the complainant and other prosecution witnesses. The petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity, since he is differently placed to that of accused No.1 who has been granted bail on the ground that he stabbed on back of the petitioner. The petitioner/accused has not made out any grounds in this successive petition.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2321 CRL.P No. 103470 of 2023
Hence, the petition is dismissed.
In view of the disposal of the petition, IA No.1 of
2023 does not survive for consideration.
Sd/JUDGE
DSP List No.: 19 Sl No.: 5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner/accused No.3 is entitled to regular bail in a murder case on the ground of parity with co-accused who were granted bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Jayappa @ Balu S/o Bhairu Nilajakar
State of Karnataka by Kakati P S
Shivashankar Amrannavar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
