Allowed

Sri. Nagarajappa @ Nagaraju v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Nov 2024CRL.A/948/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.2 in a murder conspiracy case appealed rejection of bail. The court found no overt act alleged against him except presence, delay in recording child eyewitnesses' statements created suspicion, and charge sheet was filed. Bail was granted with conditions including a Rs.1 lakh bond.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; appellant granted bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety, subject to not threatening witnesses and appearing on all hearing dates.

Sri. Nagarajappa @ Nagaraju Vs State of Karnataka — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 948 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI NAGARAJAPPA @ NAGARAJU S/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/A GUDUPALLI VILLAGE & POST KUPPAM TALUK CHITTOOR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH – 517 425.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI NANJUNDA GOWDA M R, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KAMASAMUDRAM POLICE KOLAR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶14

SRI MALLESH S/O VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT THANIMADUGU VILLAGE DONIMADUGU POST BANGARPET TALUK K G F, KOLAR – 563 114.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1 R2 IS SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶19

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.07.2023 PASSED IN SPL. S.C. IPC AND S.C AND S.T. No.7/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 201, 302 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989, REGISTERED BY KAMASAMDRAM POLICE STATION AND ETC.

¶20

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal is filed by appellant - accused No. 2 praying to set aside the order dated 10.07.2023 passed in Spl.S.C. IPC and SC and ST 7/2023 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar, whereunder the bail application of appellant - accused No. 2 sought in respect of crime No. 11/2023 of Kamasamudram Police Station registered for offence punishable under Section 120-B, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the SC ST (POA) Act’) came to be rejected.

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶25

Heard learned counsel for appellant - accused

¶26

No. 2 and learned HCGP for respondent No. 1 – State. Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and unrepresented.

¶27

Case of the prosecution as per column No. 17 of

¶28

the charge sheet is that accused No.1 is the wife of the deceased Thimmappa and she had illicit relationship with accused No.2 and in that regard the deceased had advised his wife – accused No. 1 to stop the said illicit relationship. Enraged by the same, on 11.02.2023 accused Nos.1 and 2 conspired to kill the deceased when they were returning from coolie work in train. On 11.02.2023 at about 08.00 pm accused No. 1 returned to her house and accused No. 2 returned to his house. Accused No.1 gave Rs.100/- to her husband – deceased for consuming alcohol and thereafter she made a phone call from her mobile to the mobile of accused No.2 and asked him to come to her house. Accused No. 2 came to her house. When the deceased was sleeping in the house, accused No.1 put a size stone on his head and chin and he sustained serious

¶29

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶30

injuries and died on the sport. Thereafter, accused Nos.1 and 2 took the body and threw it in the land of one Narayanappa and accused No.1 had cleaned the blood stains in her house. Charge sheet has been laid against accused No.1 for offence under Sections 120-B, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and charge sheet has been laid against accused No.2 for offence under Sections 120-B, 302, 201 read with Section 34 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC ST Act. Appellant - accused No.2 came to be arrested on 12.02.2023 and he is in judicial custody. Appellant - accused No. 2 filed bail application along with accused No. 1 and bail application of appellant - accused No.2 came to be rejected by order dated 10.07.2023 and accused No. 1 has been granted bail by the very same order. The appellant - accused No.2 being aggrieved by the said order has filed this appeal.

¶31

Learned counsel for appellant - accused No.2 would contend that C.W.2 and C.W.3 are the two children of the deceased who are cited as eye witnesses in the charge sheet and their statements are recorded after 16

¶32

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶33

days of the incident and it creates a doubt regarding they being the eye witnesses to the incident. The appellant - accused No.2 is in judicial custody since more than 1-½ years and as charge sheet is filed, he is not required for custodial interrogation. Complaint has been filed by the brother of the deceased on 12.02.2023 and no overt act is alleged against appellant - accused No.2 except the illicit relationship between him and accused No.1. Said complaint has been filed only on suspicion as appellant - accused No. 2 had illicit relationship with accused No.1 who is the wife of the deceased. On these grounds he prayed for allowing the appeal and grant of bail to appellant - accused No. 2.

¶34

Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that C.W.2 and C.W.3 are the two children of the deceased who have seen the appellant - accused No.2 putting the stone on the head and chin of the deceased and causing severe injuries and death. Said stone has been recovered from the spot and it is sent for FSL for examination and report is awaited. The appellant - accused No.2 is a resident of

¶35

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶36

Andhra Pradesh and if he is granted bail, he will not be available for trial and there is threat to the prosecution witnesses including the two children of the deceased. On these grounds he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

¶37

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

¶38

this Court has perused the impugned order and charge sheet material.

¶39

The alleged incident has taken place on 12.02.2023 during night hours in the house of accused No. 1 and the deceased. C.W.2 and C.W.3 who are the children of the deceased and accused No. 1 are cited as eye witnesses in the charge sheet. Statements of C.W.2 and C.W.3 have been recorded on 28.02.2023 even though the incident has taken place on 12.02.2023. In the statements both C.W.2 and C.W.3 have stated that this appellant - accused No.2 put stone on the head and chest of their father and they saw it. The delay in recording the statement of C.W.2 and C.W.3 creates a suspicion regarding they witnessing the incident. The statements of C.W.2 and C.W.3 are also recorded under Section 164 of

¶40

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶41

Cr.P.C. C.W.2 in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has stated that when she and her younger brother were sleeping, they heard a sound, woke up and saw appellant - accused No. 2 putting a stone on the head and face of their father. C.W.3 has stated in his statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. that on hearing a sound he got up and at that time there was bleeding injury on the head and face of his father and at that time his elder sister told him that as appellant - accused No. 2 had put stone on their father, there was bleeding.

¶42

On perusal of column No. 17 of the charge sheet overt act is alleged only against accused No. 1 of putting stone on the face and head of the deceased – Thimmappa. There is no overt act against appellant - accused No. 2 in column No. 17 of the charge sheet except mentioning his presence in the house of the deceased. As charge sheet is filed, appellant - accused No.2 is not required for custodial interrogation. Considering all these aspects the appellant - accused No.2 has made out grounds for setting aside the impugned order and grant of

¶43

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶44

bail. Merely because appellant - accused No.2 is a resident of Andhra Pradesh he cannot be denied bail and his

¶45

presence can be secured for trial by imposing conditions.

¶46

In the result the following;

¶47

O R D E R

¶48

The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.07.2023 passed in Spl.S.C. IPC and SC and ST No.7/2023 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar is set aside insofar as appellant - accused No.2 is concerned. The appellant - accused No. 2 is granted bail in crime No. 11/2023 of Kamasamudram Police Station pending in Spl.S.C. IPC and SC and ST No.7/2023 subject to the following conditions:

¶49

i. The appellant - accused No.2 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶50

ii. The appellant - accused No.2 shall not threaten the complainant and other prosecution witnesses.

¶51

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:45642 CRL.A No. 948 of 2024

¶52

iii. The appellant - accused No. 2 shall appear on all dates of hearing before the trial Court unless exempted and cooperate in speedy disposal of the case.

¶53

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶54

LRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

Sri. Nagarajappa @ Nagaraju v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Nagarajappa @ Nagaraju 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

Nataraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Vasu S C Vs State of Karnataka by

Smt Rashmi D R Vs Sri K S Manjunatha @ Santro Ravi

Savin S/O Siddappa Daddi Vs State of Karnataka

Sonnappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Mahesh Kishan Motewar Vs State by