Dismissed¶¶60

Sri K M Suresh Gowda v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Jun 2025CRL.P/1323/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, Bengaluru (J.M. Khazi J., 02.06.2025) - CRL.P No. 1323 of 2018 (NC: 2025:KHC:18524): Section 482 CrPC petition by K M Suresh Gowda (accused No.4) against rejection of his Section 227 CrPC discharge application in S.C.No.237/2011 before II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mandya (Maddur P.S.; murder of taxi driver of Tata Sumo TN-24E-2868; IPC Ss.120-B, 302, 201, 379, 441 r/w 34). Petition dismissed; prima facie material held to exist against accused No.4 (replacement of registration plate with fake number KA53-6995, travelling with co-accused); impugned order dated 13.12.2017 confirmed. Keywords: discharge, Section 227 CrPC, Section 482 CrPC, conspiracy, murder, sale of vehicle used in crime.

What did the court decide?

There is prima facie material to proceed against all the accused persons, including accused No.4.

Sri K M Suresh Gowda Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶60

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of the trial Court rejecting accused No.4's application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. for discharge should be set aside in exercise of the High Court's jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. +1 more

¶¶26

Court's answer

The trial Court rightly rejected accused No.4's discharge application; this Court finds no justifiable grounds to interfere with the impugned order, and the petition fails.

¶¶55

Ratio / Principle

There is prima facie material to proceed against all the accused persons, including accused No.4.

¶¶55

Key takeaways

Accused No.4's conduct in replacing the vehicle's registration number with a fake registration number and moving along with accused Nos.2 and 3 clearly indicates his involvement.ratio¶¶55
It is for the prosecution to prove the allegations against accused No.4 in a full-fledged trial.ratio¶¶55

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition No. 1323 of 2018 (under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; cf. 528 BNSS) - K M Suresh Gowda, arraigned as accused No.4 in S.C.No.237/2011 (Maddur P.S.) for offences under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 379, 441 r/w 34 IPC arising out of the alleged conspiracy by accused Nos.1-3 to hire a Tata Sumo taxi, kill its driver (Satish @ Naveen Raghavendra) by liquor laced with sleeping tablets and sell the vehicle - challenged the order dated 13.12.2017 of the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mandya rejecting his discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. Held (J.M. Khazi J., single judge), dismissing the petition: there is prima facie material to proceed against all the accused including accused No.4; his conduct in replacing the vehicle's registration number with a fake one and moving along with accused Nos.2 and 3 clearly indicates his involvement; the allegations are for the prosecution to prove in a full-fledged trial; the trial Court rightly rejected the discharge application and no justifiable grounds exist for interference. Impugned order dated 13.12.2017 confirmed. Decision date: 02.06.2025.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:18524 CRL.P No. 1323 of 2018

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1323 OF 2018

¶8

(482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI K M SURESH GOWDA S/O SRI MAGADAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, PERMANENT R/OF D.NO.132, NEW NO.46 AMBA BHAVANI ROAD, KALASIPALYA, BENGALURU-560002 NOW RESIDING AT D/NO.643/1, 8^TH MAIN ROAD, 2^ND STAGE BASAVESWARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560079

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

(BY SRI.SOMASHEKARA.K.M, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MADDUR POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI.VENKAT SATYANARAYAN.A, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.12.2017 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:18524 CRL.P No. 1323 of 2018

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA IN S.C.NO.237/2011 CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/S 227 OF CRPC.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.4 has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the order rejecting the application filed by him under Section 227 CRPC seeking discharge.

¶27

For the sake of convenience, parties are

¶28

referred to by their ranks before the trial Court.

¶29

A charge sheet came to be filed against accused No.4 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 379, 441 r/w 34 IPC, alleging that accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 entered into a conspiracy to hire a taxi and commit the murder of the driver and thereafter sell it for monetary benefit. Accordingly, on 05.06.2010, accused Nos.1 to 3 hired a Tata Sumo bearing registration number

¶30

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:18524 CRL.P No. 1323 of 2018

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

TN–24E–2868 from Krishnagiri to Mysuru. Near Madduru,

¶34

they purchased liquor from roadside liquor shop and stop the vehicle. They offered liquor to the driver N.Satish @ Naveen Raghavendra. They made him to drink liquor laced

¶35

with sleeping tablets. When he became imbalanced, accused Nos.1 to 3 assaulted him and throttle his neck with a waist belt. They took away the Tata Sumo and offered to sell it to accused No.4, through accused Nos.5 and 6. After purchasing the said vehicle accused No.4 replaced its registration plate with registration number KA53–6995 and was using the said vehicle despite knowing that the vehicle is involved in a heinous crime.

¶36

Accused No.4 filed application under Section 227 Cr.P.C seeking discharge on the ground that the allegations against accused are vague, malafide and unreasonable and unwarranted and continuation of the criminal proceedings amount to abuse of process of law. There are no over tacts attributed to the accused No.4. The allegations against accused No.4 are based on the

¶37

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:18524 CRL.P No. 1323 of 2018

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

statements of accused Nos.1 to 3 which is inadmissible. Even if the entire charge sheet material placed on record is accepted as correct, then also there is nothing to proceed against accused No4. Continuation of the criminal proceedings against accused number four No.4 amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence the petition.

¶41

Learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that after accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 killed the driver of the Tata Sumo and offered to sell the same to accused No.4, through accused Nos.5 and 6, he has purchased it, despite knowing that it is used for commission of murder. After the purchase, he has removed its registration number plate and replaced it by registration No.KA-53-6995 and was using the same. Accused No.4 was intercepted while he was travelling in the said vehicle along with accused Nos.1 and 2 and since they failed to give proper explanation, they were interrogated and ultimately accused No.4 was implicated in the said crime number . The vehicle was seized from the

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18524 CRL.P No. 1323 of 2018

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

possession of accused No.4. After detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed. There is a prima facie material to proceed against all the accused persons, including accused No. 4. Rightly, the trial Court has refused to discharge him and pray to dismiss this petition also.

¶45

Heard arguments and perused the record.

¶46

Thus, it is the definite case of the prosecution

¶47

that accused Nos.1 to 3 in furtherance of their conspiracy hired Tata Sumo bearing registration No.TN-24-E-2868 from Krishnagiri to Mysuru. On the way, they purchased liquor and made the driver in the vehicle Satish @ Naveen

¶48

Raghavendra to consume liquor laced with sleeping pills. When he was under the influence of the sleeping pills, accused Nos.1 to 3 killed him and took away the vehicle. Later they sold it to accused No.4 through accused Nos.5

¶49

and 6. It is the specific case of the prosecution that accused No.4 purchased the said vehicle knowing that it is involved in crime. He also removed the registration

¶50

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:18524 CRL.P No. 1323 of 2018

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

number of the said vehicle and replaced it by another registration number. Only during the investigation, the said vehicle was intercepted by the investigating officer and on interrogation it was revealed that accused Nos.1 to

¶54

3 are involved and later they have sold the vehicle to accused No.4, though accused No.5 and 6.

¶55

There is prima facie material to proceed against all the accused person including accused No.4. His conduct in replacing the registration number with a fake registration number and moving along with accused Nos.2 and 3 clearly indicate his involvement. It is for the prosecution to prove the allegations against him in a full fledged trial. Taking into consideration all these aspects, the trial Court has rightly rejected his application for discharge. This Court finds no justifiable grounds to interfere with the same. In the result, the petition fails and accordingly, the following:

¶56

¶57

NC: 2025:KHC:18524 CRL.P No. 1323 of 2018

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

ORDER

¶60