Allowed

H P Kusha @ Hulimane Kiran v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Oct 2024CRL.P/7241/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a murder case (Section 302 IPC) and Arms Act offence, noting that the prosecution's key witness had not supported the case and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in SC No.5030/2023 subject to personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties and conditions against witness tampering and leaving jurisdiction.

H P Kusha @ Hulimane Kiran Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:42783 CRL.P No. 7241 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7241 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

H.P. KUSHA @ HULIMANE KIRAN S/O PANDURANGA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT THORA, KEDAMULLUR VILLAGE, VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 248.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI D.P. PRASANNA, ADV., FOR SRI DIVYA R.B, ADV.)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO, VIRAJPET RURAL PS BANGALORE - 560 001 BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI M.R. PATIL, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.60/2023 OF VIRAJPET RURAL P.S. FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3,25 AND 30 OF INDIAN ARMS ACT PENDING BEFORE THE II ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE COURT KODAGU SITTINOG AT VIRAJPET.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:42783 CRL.P No. 7241 of 2024

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Accused No.1 in SC No.5030/2023 pending before the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, KodaguMadikeri District, sitting at Virajpet, arising out of Crime No.60/2023 registered by Virajpet Rural Police Station, Kodagu, for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 25 and 30 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959, is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶25

FIR in Crime No.60/2023 was registered by Virajpet Rural Police Station, Kodagu District, against the petitioner and two others for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959, on the basis of the first information dated 16.04.2023 received from Baimana Nanaiah, S/o late Subbaiah, who is the father of deceased Madhu. During the course of investigation of the case, petitioner was arrested on 17.04.2023 and remanded to judicial custody. Investigation

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:42783 CRL.P No. 7241 of 2024

¶28

was completed and charge sheet was filed against three persons. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 in the charge sheet. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the Sessions Court was rejected and therefore, he had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.11155/2023 which was dismissed as against him on 12.12.2023. Subsequently, he had filed Crl.Misc.No.5110/2024 before the Trial Court, which was dismissed on 04.07.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court in this successive bail petition.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's earlier bail application was rejected for the reason that CW2, who was present near the spot of crime had identified the petitioner and he had called the petitioner immediately after the incident and enquired as to why he had done such an act. He submits that CW2 has been examined before the Trial Court as PW2 and the said witness has not supported the case of the prosecution to the extent of identifying the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Prosecution has in all cited 65 charge sheet witnesses in the present case. Therefore, there is no likelihood

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:42783 CRL.P No. 7241 of 2024

¶32

of the trial being completed in the near soon. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶33

Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition.

¶34

As per the prosecution, accused No.1 had ill-will against the deceased Madhu since he had obstructed moment of the vehicles in which accused persons were committing theft of wooden blocks. It is in this background, on the intervening night of 16.04.2023 and 17.04.2023, accused No.1/petitioner allegedly had fired at Madhu with SBBL Gun. CWs2 and 3 allegedly were present at the spot of crime on the intervening night of 16.04.2023 and 17.04.2023 and CW2 in his statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the jurisdictional Magistrate, has stated that immediately after the incident he had seen petitioner and therefore, he had called the petitioner on the mobile and enquired as to why he had done such an act and petitioner allegedly asked him not to involve in the case. CW2, who has now been examined before the Trial Court as PW2 has not completely supported the case of the prosecution and he has stated that he does not know who fired bullet on Madhu. It is in this background, PW2 was cross-examined by

¶35

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:42783 CRL.P No. 7241 of 2024

¶36

public prosecutor, but nothing material has been elicited from the mouth of this witness. Petitioner, who has no criminal antecedents is in custody from 17.04.2023. Prosecution has altogether cited 65 charge sheet witnesses in the present case and therefore, as rightly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, chance of trial being completed in the near soon is very remote. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, petitioner's prayer 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.5030/2023 pending before the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri District, sitting at Virajpet, arising out of Crime No.60/2023 registered by Virajpet Rural Police Station, Kodagu, for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 25 and 30 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959, subject to the following conditions:

¶38

a) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the

¶39

¶40

NC: 2024:KHC:42783 CRL.P No. 7241 of 2024

¶41

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

H P Kusha @ Hulimane Kiran v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H P Kusha @ Hulimane Kiran 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

Abubakkar Siddiki Vs State of Karnataka

Thaseen Sultana Vs M/S Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

Allabakash @ Chindi Bakash Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri. Manjunath v. R. Vs State by Women Police

Sri Ritiksh @ Santhosh Vs State of Karnataka

Parashurama.N Vs State of Karnataka