Allowed

Yallappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC26 Jun 2024CRL.P/200391/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C, holding that the absence of supporting prosecution witnesses entitled the accused to bail despite prior dismissals, subject to financial and conduct conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in Crime No.187 of 2020, Vijayapura Rural PS, on bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties and conditions against re-offending or witness tampering.

Yallappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:4281 CRL.P No. 200391 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶3

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200391 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

YALLAPPA S/O VITTAL KOLHAR AGED 41 YEARS OCCUPATION COOLI R/O ALIYABAD TALUK & DISTRICT - VIJAYAPURA - 586 101.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SHAIKH SAOUD, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: high court of karnataka

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH PSI RURAL PS VIJAYAPURA REPRESENTED BY ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI - 585 101.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(HCGP FOR RESPONDENT STATE (ABSENT))

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.187/2020 OF VIJAYAPURA RURAL POLICE STATION, REGISTERED UNDER SECTIONS 341, 302, 504, 506 READ WITH 34 IPC, PENDING IN S.C.NO.129/2022 ON THE FILE OF 2ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE VIJAYAPURA, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶17

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

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:4281 CRL.P No. 200391 of 2024

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner-accused No.3 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.187 of 2020 of Vijayapura Rural Police Station, pending in SC No.129 of 2022 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayapura, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 302, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Kupendra.

¶21

Heard Sri Shaik Saoud, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State is absent. No representation. Perused the materials on record.

¶22

In view of the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶23

“Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:4281 CRL.P No. 200391 of 2024

¶25

My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following:

¶26

R E A S O N S

¶27

Petitioner being accused No.3 is seeking grant of bail. He was apprehended on 25.07.2020 and since then, he is in judicial custody. As a matter of fact, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing Criminal Petition No.200761 of 2020 and Criminal Petition No.200400 of 2022 seeking grant of bail. Even though there are no eye witnesses to the incident both the petitions came to be dismissed on merits, taking into consideration the nature and seriousness of the offences, where two persons were done to death by accused Nos.1 to 4, by assaulting them with axe and the incriminating materials were recovered at the instance of the petitioners.

¶28

Now learned counsel for the petitioner produced the copies of depositions of PWs.1 to 20 and none of these witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution, including the informant. The other witnesses relied on by the prosecution are either formal or official witnesses. Therefore, detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to

¶29

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:4281 CRL.P No. 200391 of 2024

¶30

infringement to his right to life and liberty. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution.

¶31

6. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the

¶32

affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The petition is allowed.

¶35

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.187 of 2020 of Vijayapura Rural Police Station, pending in SC No.129 of 2022 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayapura, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶36

a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.

¶37

b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶38

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:4281 CRL.P No. 200391 of 2024

¶39

c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.

¶40

If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.

¶41

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

¶43

*bgn/CT:VS List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1

Yallappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yallappa 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

Sri Javaraiah Vs State of Karnataka

Narasimhamurthy B G Vs State by

Manoj Kumar R Vs State of Karnataka

Ramesh Naika N T Vs State of Karnataka

Manjula Vs State by Bellur Police

Rafeek Vs State of Karnataka