Allowed

Rajkumar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Nov 2024CRL.P/201226/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, accused no.5, in a murder conspiracy case under Section 302 IPC, noting he was not named in the initial FIR, was not identified by witnesses, and had no criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail subject to personal bond with two sureties, regular appearance, no tampering with witnesses, no further offences, and not leaving jurisdiction.

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

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8697 CRL.P No. 201226 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201226 OF 2024

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

RAJKUMAR S/O SUBHASH @ SUBHASHCHANDREA ATTUR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS OCC. DRIVER, R/O MUNNALLI VILLAGE TQ ALAND DIST KALABURAGI - 585 302.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI VEERSHETTY B KONDAMAPALLI, ADV.)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH NARONA P.S TQ: ALAND DIST: KALABURAGI REPRESENTED BY ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH - 585 103.

¶15

Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SMT. ANITA M REDDY, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S. 439 OF CR.P.C (OLD), 483 OF BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS BAIL PETITION AND THEREBY RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.5 ON BAIL IN CC NO. 4761/2024, ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.78/2024, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONOURABLE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ALAND, REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NARONA PS FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 302, 120(B)(1) R/W 149 OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8697 CRL.P No. 201226 of 2024

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

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

¶25

Accused no.5 in Crime No.78/2024 registered by Narona Police Station, Kalaburagi District, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 302, 120B(1) read with 149 IPC, is before this Court under Section 439 Cr.PC.

¶26

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶27

FIR in Crime No.78/2024 was registered by Narona Police Station, Kalaburagi District, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 307, 326, 504, 506, 149 IPC against four named persons and another on the basis of the first information dated 24.05.2024 received from Smt.

¶28

Nurjabi W/o Hiralal Ladaf. Injured Hiralal Ladaf who was the husband of the first informant Smt. Nurjabi died in the hospital on 25.05.2024, and thereafter, the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC was invoked against the accused persons. During the course of investigation of the case, petitioner herein was arrested on 23.07.2024, and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the case is completed and

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:8697 CRL.P No. 201226 of 2024

¶30

charge sheet has been filed against five persons. Petitioner is arrayed as accused no.5 in the charge sheet. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No.1455/2024 was rejected on 10.09.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶31

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Investigation of the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioner's name was not found in the FIR. The alleged eye-witnesses have not identified the petitioner in the manner known to law. In the charge sheet, the only allegation against the petitioner is that he had assaulted deceased Hiralal Ladaf with his hands and legs. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶32

Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition. She submits that the petitioner had conspired with the other accused persons to commit the murder of deceased Hiralal, and thereafter, he also had actively participated in committing the crime along with the other accused persons. His presence at the spot has been spoken to by the eye-witnesses. Accordingly, she prays to dismiss the petition.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8697 CRL.P No. 201226 of 2024

¶35

Perusal of the first information would go to show that the first informant is the wife of deceased Hiralal Ladaf, who is a eye-witnesses to the incident in question. She has named four persons who had assaulted her husband and also has stated that another person who was present at the spot of crime was a stranger. She has also stated that she would be in a position to identify him in future. During the course of investigation, petitioner and other accused were arrested. Charge sheet has been filed against five persons. Accused nos.1 to 4 in the charge sheet are the accused persons who are named in the FIR.

¶36

In the charge sheet, it is alleged that accused nos.1 & 4 had illicit relationship and this was opposed by CW-19 who is the husband of accused no.4. CW-16 & CW-17 had advised accused nos.1 & 4, and therefore, CW-17 was allegedly assaulted by accused nos.1 & 4 and a criminal case was registered in Crime No.56/2022 against accused nos.1 & 4. Thereafter, accused nos.1 & 4 allegedly had assaulted CW-19 and threw him out of his house, and they were residing as husband wife in his house. Therefore, Hiralal Ladaf who is the

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8697 CRL.P No. 201226 of 2024

¶39

husband of the first informant had advised accused nos.1 & 4. It is in this background, accused nos.1 & 4 decided to eliminate Hiralal Ladaf and they conspired with the other persons to commit his murder. In furtherance of such conspiracy, on 23.05.2024, accused nos.3 & 5 had taken Hiralal Ladaf along with them and made him consume alcohol, and thereafter, accused nos.1, 2 & 4 came there and allegedly the accused persons assaulted Hiralal Ladaf. Accused no.1 had picked up a stone and had assaulted with the same on Hiralal Ladaf's stomach and accused no.2 had assaulted Hiralal Ladaf with a wooden cudgel. Accused nos.3 to 5 allegedly had assaulted deceased Hiralal Ladaf with their hands and legs.

¶40

CW-1 - wife of deceased who is the eye-witness to the

¶41

incident, has only identified accused nos.1 to 4, and therefore, their name is found in the FIR. Accused no.5 is said to be a stranger. CW-1 or any other eye-witnesses have not identified the said accused in the manner known to law. Undisputedly, no test identification parade is conducted in the present case. Petitioner who is arrayed as accused no.5 in the charge sheet and who has no other antecedents, is in custody from 23.07.2024. Investigation in the case is completed and charge

¶42

¶43

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8697 CRL.P No. 201226 of 2024

¶44

sheet has been filed. The only allegation against accused no.5 is that he had assaulted the deceased with his hands and legs. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following order:

¶45

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.78/2024 registered by Narona Police Station, Kalaburagi District, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 302, 120B(1) read with 149 IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶46

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

¶47

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;

¶48

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

¶49

¶50

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8697 CRL.P No. 201226 of 2024

¶51

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

¶52

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.

¶53

SD/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶54

Rajkumar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar 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

Rajashekar and Ors. Vs Government of Karnataka

Sajid @ Mohammad Sajid Vs the State of Karnataka

Union Bank of India Vs Bangareppa S/O Virupakshappa Pujar

Allauddin S/O Mahamedjafar Rajabali Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Imamsab S/O Manthralli Hussainsab Vs State of Karnataka

Akash Vs the State of Karnataka by Janwad Police