Allowed

Sri Manjunatha S @ Manjanna v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Jun 2024CRL.P/5507/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, accused No.3 in a case of abetment of suicide under Sections 306 and 34 IPC, sought regular bail. Since co-accused with similar allegations were already granted bail, the court extended the benefit of parity and enlarged him on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in Crime No.119/2024 on Rs.2,00,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions

Sri Manjunatha S @ Manjanna Vs State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:22901 CRL.P No. 5507 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5507 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI MANJUNATHA .S @ MANJANNA S/O. SHIVAGA NAIK AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RESIDING AT HIREUDA THANDA DEVARAHALLI HOBLI DAVANAGERE TALUK DAVANAGERE-577 213.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. SHRIDHARA .K, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHIKKAJAJUR POLICE STATION REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AMBEDKAR BEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI .K, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.119/2024 OF CHIKKAJAJUR P.S., CHITRADURGA DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 306 AND 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND J.M.F.C COURT HOLALKERE, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:22901 CRL.P No. 5507 of 2024

¶18

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

¶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.119/2024 of Chikkajajuru Police Station, pending on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn) and JMFC Court, Holalkere, registered for the offences punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant – Basavaraj H.N.

¶21

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

¶22

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, 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

¶25

NC: 2024:KHC:22901 CRL.P No. 5507 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.3 is seeking grant of bail. He was apprehended on 13.05.2024 and since then, he is in judicial custody. The Informant has lodged the first information making specific allegations against accused Nos.1 to 3. It is stated that petitioner along with co-accused instigated the deceased to die, so that he can save money that is due to be paid to him. It is also stated that the deceased had dug 8 to 10 bore-wells but all have failed. On 01.05.2024, the deceased committed suicide by hanging. The death note left behind by the deceased referred to the name of the petitioner and other accused. In the death note, there is reference to other accused, who were also due some amount to the deceased. It is stated that there was abetment to commit suicide, as a result of which, he committed suicide by hanging.

¶29

Admittedly, accused No.1 is granted anticipatory bail in Criminal Petition No.5148/2024 vide order dated 13.06.2024. Accused No.2 against whom similar allegations are made is

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:22901 CRL.P No. 5507 of 2024

¶32

granted bail in Criminal Petition No.5124/2024 as per the order dated 22.06.2024. Since the allegations against accused No.2 and petitioner are similar, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for benefit of parity.

¶33

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The petition is allowed.

¶36

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.119/2024 of Chikkajajuru 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:

¶37

a). The petitioner shall not commit any offences.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:22901 CRL.P No. 5507 of 2024

¶42

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.

¶43

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.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

NBM

¶46

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36

Sri Manjunatha S @ Manjanna v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Manjunatha S @ Manjanna v. 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 Dhanush Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Yeshwanth H a Vs State of Karnataka

Kumara Vs State of Karnataka

Shivu @ Guddadaiah Vs State by Balur Police Station

Akhilash H P Vs State of Karnataka

Ramadas Naik Vs State by Y N Hosakote