Allowed

Arjun v. the State of Karnataka through Hulsoor Police Station

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2024CRL.P/201155/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.2 in a murder case sought regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. after the Sessions Court rejected his application. Noting parity with already-bailed co-accused, absence of criminal antecedents and custody since arrest, the High Court granted bail subject to conditions including bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on regular bail; personal bond Rs.1,00,000 with two like sureties plus standard conditions.

Arjun Vs the State of Karnataka through Hulsoor Police… — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-K:9366 CRL.P No. 201155 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201155 OF 2024

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

ARJUN S/O SHANKARRAO KRISHNAJI AGE 51 YEARS OCCUPATION: BUSINESS RESIDENT OF HULSOOR NOW @ JIYAGUDDA DIST RANGAREDDY HYDRABAD (T.S.)

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI PRADEEP KUMAR, ADV.)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HULSOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI BENCH.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SMT. ANITHA M. REDDY, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S. 439 OF CR.P.C (OLD) / U/SEC. 483 OF BNSS ACT (NEW) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN S.C NO. 5031/2024 ARISEN OUT OF CRIME NO. 0012/2024 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES U/SEC. 302, 363, 364, 364, 355, 504, 342, 201 R/W 34 IPC BY THE HULSOOR POLICE STATION AT HULSOOR PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BIDAR SITING AT BASVAKALYAN IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC-K:9366 CRL.P No. 201155 of 2024

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON ORDERSHEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶25

Accused No.2 in SC No.5031/2024 pending before the Court of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bidar, sitting at Basavakalyana, arising out of Crime No.12/2024 registered by Hulsoor Police Station, Bidar for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 365, 355, 34, 342, 363, 302 and 201 of IPC, is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶27

FIR in Crime No.12/2024 was registered by the Hulsoor Police Station, Bidar, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 34, 306, 342 and 363 of IPC, against one Anil Kumar and two others on the basis of the first information dated 09.02.2024 received from Avvamma, who is the wife of deceased – Sharanabasappa. During the course of investigation of the case, petitioner was arrested on 10.02.2024 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:9366 CRL.P No. 201155 of 2024

¶29

case is completed and charge-sheet has been filed for the aforesaid offences against three accused persons. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 in the charge-sheet. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in SC No.5031/2024 was rejected on 03.09.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accused No.1 has been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.200720/2024 and accused No.3 has been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.201038/2024. Petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. Case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶31

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State has opposed the petition.

¶32

In the present case, FIR was initially registered for the offences punishable under Sections 34, 306, 342 and 363 of IPC. Post Mortem Report of the deceased reveals that the deceased had sustained grievous injuries on the hind portion of his head and in the final opinion, the Medical Officer has stated

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC-K:9366 CRL.P No. 201155 of 2024

¶35

that the death was as a result of internal hemorrhage which is due to nasal bleeding from both nostrils due to hitting from hard and blunt object on the occipital region of the back side of

¶36

the head. Thereafter, Section 302 of IPC was invoked in the present case. The allegation of assaulting deceased on his head with a blunt object is found as against accused No.3 in the charge sheet. Accused No.1 allegedly had assaulted the deceased with his Chappal on his back and face and accused No.2/petitioner allegedly had assaulted the deceased with a wooden cudgel on his back and hind portion. Accused Nos.1 and 3 have been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.200720/2024 and Crl.P.No.201038/2024. Undisputedly, petitioner has no criminal antecedents and he is in custody from 10.02.2024 onwards. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following order:-

¶37

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in SC No.5031/2024 pending before the Court of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bidar, sitting at Basavakalyana, arising out of Crime No.12/2024 registered by

¶38

¶39

NC: 2024:KHC-K:9366 CRL.P No. 201155 of 2024

¶40

Hulsoor Police Station, Bidar for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 365, 355, 34, 342, 363, 302 and 201 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶41

a) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶42

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶43

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶44

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶45

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.

¶46

Sd/(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶47

Arjun v. the State of Karnataka through Hulsoor Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun v. the State of Karnataka through Hulsoor Police Station

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

Sangharsh Alias Sangappa S/O Kushab Kamble Vs the State of Karnataka

Akash Vs the State of Karnataka by Janwad Police

Sri Imamsab S/O Manthralli Hussainsab Vs State of Karnataka

Jaibunabi Vs the State of Karnataka

Ravindra @ Ravi Patil Vs the State of Karnataka

Manikant Vs the State