Allowed

Mr.Murali v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Jul 2024CRL.P/5941/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court granted anticipatory bail to two accused persons in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323, 324, 504, 307 IPC. The charges were altered after charge sheet filing. The court imposed conditions including furnishing bond, no tampering with witnesses, and appearance within 15 days.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted in Crime No.24/2024; petitioners enlarged on bail upon serving bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- each with two sureties and fulfilling conditions within 15 days.

Mr.Murali Vs the State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:25014 CRL.P No. 5941 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5941 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR.MURALI S/O VENUGOPALA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS OCC: COOLIE R/AT DOOR NO.19-89A-148 K S RAO NAGARA NEAR NARAYANA GURU ASSOCIATION LINGAPPAIAH KADU KARNADU VILLAGE MULKY TALUK D K DISTRICT - 574154.

¶10

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

MR. AKSHAY S/O YESHWANTHA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS OCC: COOLILE R/AT DOOR NO.19-89A-60-64 NEAR NARAYANA GURU SCHOOL K S RAO NAGARA KARNADU GRAMA, MULKY TALUK D K DISTRICT - 574154.

¶12

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA M. R., ADV.)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MULKI POLICE STATION D K DISTRICT REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:25014 CRL.P No. 5941 of 2024

¶17

HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560001.

¶18

…RESPONDENT

¶19

(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP)

¶20

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.PC., PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT/ MULKI POLICE TO RELEASE THEM ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.24/2024, DATED 16.03.2024 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT MULKI POLICE FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 341, 323, 324, 504, 307 R/W 34 OF IPC, NOW CHARGE SHEETED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 504, 307 R/W SEC. 149 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MOODABIDRI, D.K. DISTRICT AND ETC.

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioners being accused Nos.1 and 3 are before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.24/2024 of Mulki Police Station, pending on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC., Moodabidri, D.K., District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 504, 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), now charge sheeted for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 504, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC, on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Arun Kumar.

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:25014 CRL.P No. 5941 of 2024

¶25

2. Heard Sri.M.R.Balakrishna, learned counsel for

¶26

the petitioners and Smt.K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶27

In view of the rival contentions urged by the

¶28

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

¶29

“Whether the petitioners are

¶30

entitled for grant of bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶31

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

¶32

the following:

¶33

R E A S O N S

¶34

The petitioners being accused Nos.1 and 3 are seeking grant of anticipatory bail on the apprehension of being arrested. The FIR came to be registered against accused Nos.1 to 3 for the aforesaid offences. After investigation, the charge sheet is filed. Accused No.2 was

¶35

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:25014 CRL.P No. 5941 of 2024

¶36

apprehended and he is already enlarged on bail. It is stated that the beer bottle used in commission of the offences was already recovered. In the Wound Certificate pertaining to the injured i.e., CW1 and CW2, it is stated that they have sustained one simple injury each. It is not the contention of the prosecution that the petitioners are required for custodial interrogation or that they are having criminal antecedents. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution.

¶37

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

¶38

ORDER

¶39

The petition is allowed.

¶40

The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.24 of 2024 Police Station.

¶41

¶42

NC: 2024:KHC:25014 CRL.P No. 5941 of 2024

¶43

The petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and on their appearance, the Investigating Officer shall enlarge them on bail subject to the following conditions:-

¶44

a. The petitioners shall furnish the bond in a

¶45

sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

¶46

b. The petitioners shall not commit similar offences;

¶47

c. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer or the court as and when required; and

¶48

d. The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses.

¶49

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioners, the

¶50

Investigating Officer is at liberty to verify the correctness

¶51

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:25014 CRL.P No. 5941 of 2024

¶52

of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by them. On satisfaction of the said documents, he may proceed to accept the sureties within a reasonable

¶53

time.

¶54

Sd/JUDGE

¶55

NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Mr.Murali v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Murali 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

Nagaraju G D Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Sharath Kumar. K @ Sharu Vs State by Sheshadripuram P. S.

Sri. Madhu. M @ Madhu Kumar. M (A2) Vs the State of Karnataka

Narayana Moolya Alias Bandasura Vs State of Karnataka

Harshath Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Parmeshwarappa @ Parameshappa Vs State by Honnalli Police Station