Sri Suresh @ Suri Vs State of Karnataka

SRI SURESH @ SURI S/O NAGARAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT KHADRIPURA VILLAGE MULABAGAL TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT. 563 131 (ACCUSED IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY FROM 20-11-2024)

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. RAMA MURTHY N., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA LAKSHMI BY MULABAGAL RURAL POLICE Location: High Court of Karnataka REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001

¶14

SRI SURESH.R.M. S/O RAMAKRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS GANNERAHALLI VILLAGE BETHAMANGALA HOBLI

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:35244 CRL.A No. 1198 of 2025

HC-KAR

KGF TALUK,

KOLAR DIST – 563 101

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT.PUSHPALATHA B. ADDL. SPP FOR R1;

¶22

R2 SERVED)

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 08.04.2025 AND RELEASE PETITIONERS HIM ON BAIL IN SPL.SC BNS AND SC/ST NO.1/2025, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S. 103(1), 61(2)(A), 238(A) R/W SEC. 3(5) OF BNS AND SECTION 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST POA ACT, ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.269/2024, REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1, MULABAGAL RURAL POLICE, WHICH IS NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT KOLAR.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶26

3 -

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:35244 CRL.A No. 1198 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶30

The appellant who is arraigned as accused No.3 in Crime No.269/2024 of the respondent - Police is before this Court seeking regular bail for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2)(A), 238(A) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS 2003’) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC/ST (POA) Act’) and seeking to set aside the order dated 08.04.2025 passed in Spl.S.C.BNS & SC/ST No.1/2025 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge at Kolar.

¶31

Factual matrix of the case:

¶32

It is the case of the prosecution that the brother of the deceased had lodged a complaint stating that his elder brother had married accused No.1. The couple had four children. Out of four children, three are female children and one is male child. There was a difference of opinion between accused No.1 and his elder brother. Therefore, accused No.1 started residing at different places in a

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:35244 CRL.A No. 1198 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

rented house along with her children. It is further stated that, accused No.1 had an illicit relationship with CW.14. Similarly, the elder daughter of accused No.1 had also left her husband and started residing with accused No.1. She had an illicit relationship with CW.15. The said act of illicit relationship had been objected by the deceased. The accused No.1 had decided that she should stay in her matrimonial home by taking the property as she was unable to manage herself by paying the rent. Therefore, through her children, she called the deceased and requested him to take her back to Gannerahalli. In the meantime, accused Nos.1 and 2 had decided to eliminate the deceased, thinking that he would not give the property, if he is alive. Therefore, they took the help of accused No.3, who is the appellant herein. The appellant arranged the goods auto and took the deceased in the said auto. Accused Nos.2, 3 and deceased were travelling in the said auto.

¶36

It is further stated that accused No.2, who is the daughter, made the deceased to consume alcohol and he became unconscious. Thereafter, she took the towel of

¶37

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:35244 CRL.A No. 1198 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

the deceased and tied the hands, accused No.3 took his knife and cut the neck of the deceased. Consequently, he died. Thereafter, both took the lungi, cut it into pieces, tied the stone in the said lungi to the waist of the deceased and threw him into the well. In the meantime, the complainant and his parents were searching for the deceased and his whereabouts. As they could not get the information, they came to the place of accused Nos.1 and 2 and asked about the whereabouts of the deceased. They showed their innocence that they did not know the whereabouts of the deceased. Thereafter, a complaint came to be registered about the missing of the deceased.

¶40

During investigation, the fact of committing the murder of the deceased was revealed by the accused. Hence, the charge sheet came to be filed against the appellant and others for the offences stated supra .

¶41

Heard Sri.Rama Murthy.N, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.Pushpalatha, learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1.

¶42

6 -

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:35244 CRL.A No. 1198 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. The manner of committing the alleged murder had been explained and narrated by the co-accused. The respondent - police have narrated the said fact in such a manner as per their wish. Moreover, the appellant is aged about 29 years and he is a permanent resident of Khadripura Village, Mulabagal Taluk. He is the earning member of the family. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the appellant prays to allow the appeal.

¶46

Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondent No.1 – State vehemently controverted the said submissions and she further submitted that the body of the deceased was found in the well of the land belonging to accused No.3. It is the fact that the appellant had illicit relationship with accused No.2. All the accused persons transpired to eliminate the deceased in order to take the property of the deceased and live peacefully at Gannerahalli, which is the matrimonial house of accused No.1.

¶47

7 -

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:35244 CRL.A No. 1198 of 2025

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the charge-sheet, the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. The alleged murder is stated to have taken place in an isolated place. The fact of committing murder of the deceased has been narrated by the co-accused or it is on the statement of the appellant. Therefore, at this stage, it is appropriate to grant bail to the appellant by imposing suitable conditions.

¶51

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶52

ORDER

¶53

i) The Criminal Appeal is allowed. ii) The order dated 08.04.2025 passed in Spl.S.C.BNS & SC/ST No.1/2025 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge at Kolar, is set aside.

¶54

iii) The appellant / accused No.3 is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.269/2024 of respondent-police, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh

¶55