SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Kar) 21

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
H.P. SANDESH, J.
State Of Karnataka - Appellant
Versus
D.P.Dilip Kumar S/o Late Ponnappa - Respondent
Criminal Petition No.420 of 2021
Decided on : 27-01-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SRI VINAYAKA V.S, HCGP
For the Respondent:SRI PRAMOD R, ADVOCATE

Point of Law : When the sound circumstances are available against respondent and recovery was made at instance of this respondent i.e., weapon used to commit murder and blood stained clothes immediately, Trial Court ought not to have granted bail in favour of this respondent invoking Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 439(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Offence of Murder - Double murder was committed - In complaint, sister of deceased suspected role of respondent herein. Based on the same, a case has been registered and matter was under investigation and at that juncture, respondent has approached Trial Court for grant of bail - Whether or not to grant bail and further observed that mandatory duty of court to record reasons when granting bail and grant of bail is a matter involving exercise of judicial discretion.

Finding of the Court:

It is nothing but a perverse and capricious order passed by Trial Court in a hurried manner without waiting for filing of charge-sheet and the FSL report and came to conclusion that the case is rests upon the circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence - When the sound circumstances are available against respondent and recovery was made at instance of this respondent i.e., weapon used to commit murder and blood stained clothes immediately, Trial Court ought not to have granted bail in favour of this respondent invoking Section 439 of Cr.P.C - Hence, order of Trial Court is capricious and perverse and it is a fit case to invoke Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. to cancel bail and to set aside the order passed by Trial Court in favour of this respondent allegedly committed double murder in connection with prior enmity and also a civil dispute between the parties - Hence, when this respondent availed benefit under Section 439 of Cr.P.C, he has to be taken into custody in view of cancellation of bail.

Result : Petition is allowed

ORDER :

Heard the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the petitioner/State and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. This petition is filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C, by the Petitioner -State praying this Court to set aside the order dated 24.06.2019 passed in Crl.Misc.No.198/2019 on the file of Court of I Addl. District & Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Kodagu at Madikeri, and to cancel the said order granting of bail for an offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. An accused was arrested and committed to custody.

3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that a double murder was committed. In the complaint, the sister of the deceased suspected the role of the respondent herein. Based on the same, a case has been registered and the matter was under investigation and at that juncture, the respondent has approached the Trial Court for grant of bail.

4. The Trial Court having heard the respective counsel appeared before the Trial Court, made an observation in paragraph No.10 of the order that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 02.05.2019 till today. The complainant has stated in her complaint that, because of enmity with her sister Kavitha, petitioner might have murdered her sister. Further observed that when there is no direct allegation against the petitioner regarding commission of an offence, it cannot be said that the petitioner was involved in this case at this stage, which requires to be investigated by the police. Till then the petitioner cannot be put in Judicial Custody as a measure of punishment in the stage of pre-trial. Hence, granted bail. The same is questioned before this Court in this petition contending that the trial Judge has committed an error in enlarging the petitioner on bail in a heinous offence of double murder that too in a crime stage and failed to apply his mind.

5. The learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the petitioner/State would contend that the blood stained weapons and clothes were subjected to FSL examination, which was recovered at the instance of the respondent. The said FSL report is also conclusive that the blood found on the said clothes and weapons belonged to the deceased and that of the blood stains of the clothes of the accused was also found. Apart from that, both post-mortem report of the deceased Kavitha, who is aged about 45 years would show six chop wounds and the post-mortem report of the deceased Jagashree, aged about 17 years, also would show five chop wounds and it is a barbaric act. Instead of waiting for the FSL report with regard to the recovery is concerned during the crime stage, the bail has been granted, the same is perverse and capricious. Hence, it requires an interference of this Court.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the case is rests upon the circumstantial evidence and there are no eyewitnesses to the incident and also the respondent was in the custody from the date of his arrest i.e., 02.05.2019 and the trial Judge while passing the order in paragraph No.10 discussed in detail that there is no direct allegation against the petitioner regarding commission of an offence. Hence, the matter requires to be investigated by the police and no need to continue him in the custody as a measure of punishment in the stage of pre-trial. Hence, the order does not amount to any perverse or capricious order. The learned counsel also would submit that after granting bail, the charge-sheet was also filed. Hence, it does not require any interference of this Court.

7. Having heard the respective counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, particularly, the complaint, wherein, a specific allegation is made in the complaint that she comes to know about committing the murder of his sister and his sister’s daughter in the copy plantation, immediately she rushed to the spot found the dead body and murder was committed by using the deadly weapons a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top