Allowed

Sri Sathish v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Oct 2024CRL.A/1549/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal under Section 14(A)(2) SC/ST Act against rejection of bail to accused No.11 in a murder case, charged as a conspirator who supplied weapons. Court found no material implicating him, no recovery or criminal antecedents, investigation complete, and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant/accused No.11 released on bail in Crime No.369/2023 on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties and conditions against leaving jurisdiction, tampering, and requiring attendance.

Sri Sathish Vs the State of Karnataka — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:40884 CRL.A No. 1549 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1549 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. SATHISH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, SON OF DAMODHARAN, RESIDING AT NO.657, 17^TH 'D' CROSS, OPPOSITE: KORAMANGALA CLUB KORAMANGALA 6^TH BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 034.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. GAJENDRA S., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ADUGODI POLICE STATION REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU 560 001

¶14

SRI. MURALIDHAR SON OF LATE VENUGOPALA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS NO.7/17, 15^TH CROSS, SUBBARAJU LAYOUT, LAKKASANDRA, BENGALURU-560 030

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP FOR R1; R2 IS SERVED)

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:40884 CRL.A No. 1549 of 2024

¶18

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT/11TH ACCUSED ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.756/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120B,109,143,147,148,302,212, ,201,37 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SEC.25(1)(B)(b) OF ARMS ACT.1959 AND SEC.3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,1989 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE LXX ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE AT BENGALURU CITY.

¶19

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

This appeal is preferred by accused No.11 in Spl.C.No.756/2024, pending on the file of LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-71), praying to set aside the order dated 5.4.2024, rejecting his petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. and consequently to enlarge him on bail.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State and perused the material on record.

¶23

Respondent No.2/complainant is served but

¶24

unrepresented.

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:40884 CRL.A No. 1549 of 2024

¶26

It is the case of prosecution that, on account of previous enmity, all the accused formed an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons on 24.12.2023 at about 6.30 p.m. and chased deceased Jayaprakash @ Appi, inside one Vijayasagar Hotel, situated at 13^th main, 14^th cross, Wilsongarden, Lakkasandra, Bengaluru and assaulted him indiscriminately all over his body with the weapons they were carrying and committed his murder.

¶27

FIR is registered against one Sharath @ Puliyogare and

¶28

5 of his friends on a complaint lodged by Sri.Murulidhar, brother of deceased, for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 r/w 149 IPC.

¶29

Appellant came to be arrested on 30.12.2023. He is in judicial custody. Bail petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. Hence, this appeal.

¶30

As per complaint averments, on 24.12.2023 when the complainant i.e., brother of the deceased was standing near Auto Stand in Lakkasandra along with his friend Hanumantha Rao, at about 6.30 p.m., accused by name Sharath @

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:40884 CRL.A No. 1549 of 2024

¶32

Puliyogare and 5 of his friends, holding choppers and longs came in two wheelers and attacked his brother Jayaprakash, who ran for his life inside Vijayasagar hotel. All the accused chased him and assaulted with lethal weapons they were carrying and after committing his murder, sped away in their vehicles.

¶33

Learned High Court Government Pleader has contended that the deceased has sustained as many as 30 external injuries and the cause of death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of multiple chop injuries sustained. He submits that the petitioner is also one of the conspirators and he has supplied weapons to the assailants and in the CCTV footages, the appellant was seen at the spot after the commission of the offence. He contended that the offence committed being a heinous offence, if the appellant is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and also flee from justice.

¶34

Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that, appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. His name does not find a place in FIR and subsequently,

¶35

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:40884 CRL.A No. 1549 of 2024

¶36

he is arrayed as accused No.11 at the time of filing charge sheet without any material. He submitted that the appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 30.12.2023 and now investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. He submits that the appellant is ready and willing to abide by any conditions. Accordingly, he sought to allow the appeal and enlarge the appellant on bail.

¶37

The learned Sessions Judge while rejecting the bail petition of the appellant herein has observed that the alleged crime is a heinous one, material objects are seized based on the lead provided by the accused and certain witnesses have been subjected to Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement who have specifically deposed before the Jurisdictional Magistrate and therefore, if at all accused is granted bail, there is every possibility of tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶38

The complainant claims to be an eye witness to the incident. FIR is lodged against one Sharath and 5 others. It is specifically stated that the said accused chased the deceased and assaulted him with the weapons they were carrying. A perusal of the post mortem report would reveal that the

¶39

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:40884 CRL.A No. 1549 of 2024

¶40

deceased was brutally assaulted and done to death. However, it is not alleged that appellant is one of the assailants. While filing charge sheet he is arrayed as accused no.11. Allegations against him is that he is one of the conspirators and supplied weapons to other accused.

¶41

The statements of some of the witnesses under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. are recorded. I have perused the said statements. None of the witnesses have named the appellant. At this stage, there is no sufficient material to show that appellant was one of the conspirators or that he supplied weapons. The prosecution has to establish its case against the appellant in a full fledged trial. There is no recovery of incriminating materials from the appellant. No criminal antecedents against him are brought to the notice of the Court. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed.

¶42

The apprehension of the prosecution that the appellant may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and he may flee from justice etc., can be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions.

¶43

¶44

NC: 2024:KHC:40884 CRL.A No. 1549 of 2024

¶45

For the aforementioned reasons, the appeal deserves

¶46

to be allowed. Accordingly, the following :

¶47

ORDER

¶48

i) Appeal is allowed.

¶49

ii) The order dated 5.4.2024 passed by the Court of LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru, in Special Case No.756/2024, rejecting the bail petition of appellant/accused no.11 is set aside.

¶50

iii) Appellant/accused no.11 is ordered to be released on bail in the above case, arising out of Crime No.369/2023 of Adugodi Police Station, subject to following conditions:

¶51

He shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶52

He shall furnish proof of his residential address and shall inform the Investigation Officer/Court, if there is any change in the address.

¶53

He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the learned session Judge.

¶54

NC: 2024:KHC:40884 CRL.A No. 1549 of 2024

¶55

¶56

He shall not tamper with the prosecution

¶57

witnesses either directly or indirectly.

¶58

He shall appear before the trial Court on all dates

¶59

of hearing without fail.

¶60

Violation of any of the bail condition/s shall result in

¶61

cancellation of bail.

¶62

SD/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶63

Sri Sathish v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sathish 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

Mr Sanjeev Kumar Vs State

Mohammed Latheef @ Abdul Latheef Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Venkatesh Gulwady Alias Tinku Vs State by

Charan J S Vs State of Karnataka

Sharath Babu L S Vs Smt. Megha

B.C.Nagesh Vs the State of Karnataka by the