Allowed

Raghavendra Alias Raghu v. the State by

Karnataka HC7 Jun 2024CRL.P/3691/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.2 in a murder case sought regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The court noted no recovery from the petitioner, no eyewitnesses, reliance on circumstantial evidence and no criminal antecedents, and enlarged him on bail with conditions including a Rs.2 lakh bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on Rs.2,00,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions against similar offences, witness tampering, and requiring appearance before the court.

Raghavendra Alias Raghu Vs the State by — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:19790 CRL.P No. 3691 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3691 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

RAGHAVENDRA @ RAGHU SON OF SHARANA BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, NO.7/66/1, 1^ST CROSS, NEAR K.B. TEMPLE, GOPALAPUR, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by MAYAGAIAH VINUTHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE BY MAGADI ROAD POLICE STATION, REPT. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI.K, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.222/2023 OF MAGADI ROAD P.S., BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFECE P/U/S 302,201,120-B R/W SEC.34,35 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS CITY CIVIL COURT AT BENGLAURU (CCH-70) IN S.C.NO.1833/2023.

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:19790 CRL.P No. 3691 of 2024

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner-accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.222/2023 of Magadi Road Police Station, pending in S.C.No.1833/2023 on the file of the learned LXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 35, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant-Suresh Bhandari.

¶21

Heard Sri.Saravana.S., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Rahul Rai.K., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused the materials on record.

¶22

In view of the rival contentions urged by the

¶23

learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶24

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

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:19790 CRL.P No. 3691 of 2024

¶26

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

¶27

R E A S O N S

¶28

The petitioner being accused No.2 is seeking grant

¶29

of bail. He was apprehended on 10.08.2023. It is alleged that accused No.1 being son of CW.9 was having close association with the deceased. He had motive to cause the death. Accused Nos.2 and 3 said to be his friends and all the accused conspired together and stabbed the deceased with a knife and as a result of which, he died. The post mortem report discloses that the deceased sustained as many as 31 injuries and the cause of death is due to stab injuries sustained. It is stated that the blood stained knife used in the commission of offence was recovered at the instance of accused No.1. But admittedly, there is no such recovery at the instance of the present petitioner. It is noticed that there are no eyewitnesses to the incident. The prosecution is relying on the circumstantial evidence. It is not the contention of the prosecution that the petitioner is having criminal antecedents. Considering all these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:19790 CRL.P No. 3691 of 2024

¶32

will take care of the apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioner may abscond or may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses.

¶33

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the

¶34

affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

The petition is allowed.

¶37

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.222/2023 of Magadi Road Police Station, 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:

¶38

a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

¶42

NC: 2024:KHC:19790 CRL.P No. 3691 of 2024

¶43

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.

¶44

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.

¶45

Sd/JUDGE

¶46

VM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Raghavendra Alias Raghu v. the State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghavendra Alias Raghu v. the State by

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

Deepak Alis Deepu Alis Kalla Deepu Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Vinoda S/O Chandru Vs State by Yesaluru P.S.

Union of India Vs Thaha Ummer K S

G Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Animesh Biswas Vs State of Karnataka by

Tajamul Ahmed Vs State of Karnataka