Allowed

Mr. Shankar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Nov 2024CRL.P/9921/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought by accused No.8 in a murder case involving KCOCA and SC/ST Act charges, where he allegedly conspired and paid money to facilitate his brother's plan to murder a rival rowdy sheeter. Court granted bail considering prolonged custody, remote trial prospects with 231 witnesses, and family circumstances.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in Spl.C.C.No.124/2024 on personal bond Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties, subject to conditions of regular appearance, no tampering with witnesses, and no leaving trial cour

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

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9921 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR. SHANKAR S/O SRI SELVA R AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT NO 10, 3RD CROSS, GINDAPPA REDDY LAYOUT CHOLANAYAKANAHALLI HEBBAL BENGALURU-560024.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. ABHINAYA K., A/W SRI. K.V. MANOJ., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY D.J.HALLI PS REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-560001

¶15

MR. PREM.J S/O LATE. JAISHEELAN AGED 38 YEARS R/AT NO.4 1ST CROSS ADARSHA NAGAR R.T.NAGAR POST BANGALORE-560032

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. M. DIWAKAR MADDUR., HCGP FOR R1 SRI.MALLESH L., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶19

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 (FILED U/S.483 BNNS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIOENR ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.162/2023 (SPL.C.NO.124/2024) REGISTERED BY THE D. J. HALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 120-B, 109, 114, 302, 201, 204 R/W SEC.34, 36, 37, 149 OF IPC AND U/S.3(1), 3(2), 3(3),3 (4) OF KCOCA 2000 AND U/S.3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989 NOW PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGLAURU CITY IN SPL.C.NO.124/2024 AND ETC.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Accused No.8 in Spl.C.C.No.124/2024 pending before

¶24

the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.162/2023 registered by Devarajeevanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 109, 114, 302, 201, 204 read with 34, 36, 37, 149 of IPC and under Sections 3(1), 3(2), 3(3) and 3(4) of Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act, 2000 (KCOCA) and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail.

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

FIR in Crime No.162/2023 was registered by

¶29

Deverajeevanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru, initially for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC against unknown persons on the basis of first information dated 11.07.2023 received from Prem J., who is the elder brother of deceased Kapil J. During the course of investigation of the case, the petitioner herein was arrested on 14.07.2023 and subsequently, remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed against 9 persons for the aforesaid offences. The petitioner herein as arrayed as accused No.8 in the charge sheet.

¶30

The bail application filed by the petitioner before the trial Court in Spl.C.C.No.124/2024 was rejected on 01.07.2024. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶33

merely for the reason that the petitioner is the elder brother of accused No.9, who is a rowdy sheeter has been

¶34

falsely implicated in the present case. Only allegation against the petitioner is that he had conspired with other accused who committed murder of Kapila and also had paid supari money to accused No.6. Learned Counsel submits that even in the two criminal cases registered against the petitioner earlier, there are no serious allegations against him. The petitioner is in custody for the last more than one year. He is required to take care of his

¶35

aged mother, who is suffering from ailment and his brother-accused No.9 in the present case is also in judicial custody. Accordingly, she prays to allow the petition.

¶36

Per contra, learned High Court Government

¶37

Pleader and learned Counsel appearing for de facto - complainant have strongly opposed the petition. They submit that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents and in the event he is enlarged on bail, he may commit similar offences and is likely to tamper with

¶38

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶39

the material charge sheet witnesses. The petitioner has conspired with the other accused persons to commit the murder of deceased Kapil J. There is sufficient material to show that he has paid supari amount to accused No.6. They submit that the services of accused No.1 to 4 was hired by accused No.6 and other accused persons to commit murder of deceased Kapil J. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the petition.

¶40

Perusal of the material available before this Court would go to show that initially FIR was registered against unknown persons after deceased Kapil J who was a rowdy sheeter, was murdered on 11.07.2023 at about 8.00 p.m. near D Mart at KHB road within the jurisdiction of Devrajeevanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru. During the course of the investigation, the petitioner and other accused persons were arrested and remanded to judicial custody. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against 9 accused persons and the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.8 in the charge sheet.

¶41

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶42

Allegation of assaulting deceased Kapil J on 11.07.2023 with deadly weapons is as against accused No.1 to 4. According to the prosecution, deceased Kapil J, who was a rowdy sheeter, was attempting to collect hafta and gain control over the areas in which accused No.8 and his brother-accused No.9 were attempting to have a control and were collecting hafta. Therefore, there was a ill-will between the petitioner/accused No.8 and Kapil J. In that background, Kapil J allegedly has assaulted Accused No.8 a few days prior to the alleged date of incident in the case on hand.

¶43

After coming to know about the same, accused

¶44

No.9, who is the brother of the petitioner had contacted accused No.6-Shashikumar R., over mobile phone and asked him to prepare a plan to commit murder of Kapil J. Accordingly, accused No.6, 8 and 9 had thereafter contacted accused No.5 and conspired to commit the murder of Kapil J and accused No.9 had paid a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to accused No.5 through accused No.8. In

¶45

¶46

NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶47

furtherance of such conspiracy, accused No.1 to 4 were instructed by accused No.5 to commit the murder of Kapil J, and on 11.07.2023 at about 8.00 p.m. near D Mart, at KHB road within the jurisdiction of Deverajeevanahalli Police Station, accused No.1 to 4 had assaulted Kapil J with deadly weapons and committed his murder.

¶48

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he had conspired with his brother-accused No.9, who is a rowdy sheeter and also paid a sum of Rs.54,500/- to accused No.6 on instructions from accused no.9.

¶49

Learned Counsel for the respondents have brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents.

¶50

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that Crime No.246/2020 was registered by R.T.Nagar Police for the offence punishable under Sections

¶51

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶53

504, 212, 307 read with 34 of IPC and perusal of the charge sheet in the said case would go to show that allegation of assault in the said case is only as against accused No.1 to 4 and the petitioner herein has arrayed as accused No.5 in the said case. Accused No.4 in the said case is the younger brother of the petitioner herein, who is arrayed as accused No.9 in the present case. Allegation as against the petitioner, in the said case is that he had harboured his brother-Ravi and therefore, charge sheet is filed for the offence punishable under Section 504, 212, 307 of IPC. Crime No.8/2021 was registered by Kumaraswamy Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 120B, 109, 341, 504 and 140 read with Section 149 of IPC. Initially FIR in the said case was registered against unknown persons and the charge sheet was subsequently filed against 7 persons and the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.3 in the charge sheet and his brother-Ravi, who is accused No.9 in the present case is arrayed as accused No.1 in the said case. The victim had suffered only simple injuries in the said case.

¶54

¶55

NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶56

The petitioner has been enlarged on bail in both the cases registered against him earlier. If the aforesaid criminal antecedents of the petitioner are considered and appreciated in the background of the definitions of the words 'Organized Crime' and 'Organized Crime Syndicate' of the KCOCA Act, a question arises whether the petitioner can be considered as a Member of 'Organized Crime Syndicate indulged in activities of organized crime.

¶57

In the present case, only allegation as against the petitioner is that he had conspired with his brotheraccused No.9 and other accused persons to commit the murder of Kapil J. Kapil J as well as accused No.9 both are rowdy sheeters, who were attempting to take control of the same area for the purpose of collecting hafta. The petitioner is in custody from 11.07.2023 onwards. The case before the trial Court is still at the stage of Hearing Before Charge. The prosecution in altogether has cited 231 charge sheet witnesses in the present case. Therefore, the chances of the trial being completed in the near further is

¶58

10 - NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶59

very remote. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is required to take care of his aged mother who is suffering from age old ailments. The material would go to show that his brother-accused No.9 is also in judicial custody. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the prima facie view that the prayer made by petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively.

¶60

Accordingly, the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

The Criminal Petition is allowed .

¶63

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl.C.C.No.124/2024 pending before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.162/2023 registered by Devarajeevanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 109, 114, 302, 201, 204 read with 34, 36, 37, 149 of IPC and under Sections 3(1), 3(2), 3(3) and 3(4) of KCOCA-2000 and under Section 3(2)(v) of the

¶64

11 -

¶65

NC: 2024:KHC:46185 CRL.P No. 9921 of 2024

¶66

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, subject to the following conditions:

¶67

a) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶68

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;

¶69

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶70

d) 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.

¶71

Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶72

DL CT: JL

Mr. Shankar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Shankar 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

Adithya G D Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Chandru @ Ramachandra Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Kiran. S Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Venkataraju Vs State by Dibburahalli Ps

Dinesh @ Tenatos Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Mohammad C a Vs the State by