Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
V. SRISHANANDA, J.
Mr Narayanaswamy S/o Late Balanna - Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 10586 of 2022
Decided on : 21-03-2023
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 438, 439 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 201, 302, 120(B) & 34 - Grant of bail – Murder offence - Seizure of gold ornaments - Prayed on behalf of petitioner/Accused No.1 that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass an order granting bail thereby directing respondent police to release petitioner – Material available on record at this stage would definitely dis-entitle petitioner from obtaining an order of grant of bail - Para 34.
Finding of the Court: In case of Sharad Biradhichand Sarda, Hon’ble Apex Court was considering relevant factors to hold that a particular accused is guilty of offence when case is based on circumstantial evidence and their Lordships in that celebrated judgment have enunciated that five important circumstances are to be established by prosecution in order to bring home guilt of accused based on circumstantial evidence - Suffice to say that material available on record at this stage would definitely dis-entitle petitioner from obtaining an order of grant of bail by resorting to special powers vested in Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C., especially in view of fact that there is a huge quantity of gold is recovered from custody of accused based on his voluntary statement - Accordingly, Court is of considered opinion that grounds urged in petition are hardly sufficient to admit request of grant of bail.
Result: Petition dismissed.
ORDER :
1. Heard Smt. Pauline Priyanka B. learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Sharon I Princilly, for the accused/petitioner and Sri S Vishwamurthy, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. This Petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., with the following prayer:
3. Brief facts of the case are as under:
A complaint came to be lodged by Smt. Christina.P W/o George in Kumaraswamy Layout police station which was registered in Cr.No.216/2021 on 20.08.2021 for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 201 of IPC, initially against the unknown person.
4. Gist of the complaint averments reveal that Christina.P is the relative of Smt. Premalatha and her husband Shantharaju. Premalatha and Shantharaju were residing in house bearing No.236, 2nd Main, Harsha School Road, Harsha Layout, Kashinagar, Yelachenahalli, Bengaluru City. Shantharaju retired as a Mechanic from in BMTC about 18 years earlier and was living with his wife and they had no children of their own and as such they have adopted one girl by name Harshitha @ Baby. She used to often visit the house of Premalatha and Shantharaju.
5. When the matter stood thus, on 20.08.2021 at about 2.30 p.m., Shobha one of the tenants of Shantharaju called the mother-in-law of the complainant by name Asha and told that somebody had murdered both Premalatha and Shantharaju. Immediately, complainant, his younger sisters Reena and Latha visited the house of Shantharaju at about 5.30 pm., and went inside the house and noticed that dead body of Premalatha was found in bathroom and dead body of Shantharaju was found in the bedroom.
6. Based on the complaint, police registered a case against the unknown person and investigated the matter. During the course of the investigation, the petitioner has been apprehended by the police on 23.08.2021 and gold ornaments weighing 72 grams were recovered from the custody of the petitioner based on his voluntary statement. The police were also able to recover gold ornaments from the co-accused persons.
7. The voluntary statement further discloses that the petitioner and others hatched a plan to take away the life of the couple and take away the valuables found in the house of Premalatha and Shantharaju. In furtherance of their plan, on the fateful day, they entered the house of Premalatha and Shantharaju, and used the force and killed both of them. The allegation as against the petitioner is that he smothered Premalatha with the help of a pillow to kill her and later on dragged her to the bathroom, and banged her head to the wall, whereby Premalatha lost her life. The co-accused persons assaulted mercilessly Shantharaju and his life was also taken of by the accused persons. Thereafter, they robbed the gold ornaments and other valuables found in the house and ran away. After arresting the petitioner, he was sent to judicial custody. During custodial interrogation, there is a recovery of robbed gold ornaments from the custody of the accused persons including the present petitioner.
8. The request for grant of bail by the petitioner was turned down by order dated 22.08.2022 in SC No.1497/2021 before the District Court. Thereafter petitioner is before this Court.
9. In the bail petition, following grounds have been raised.
It is settled principles of law that in a circumstantial evidence, petitioner/accused would not be entitled to grant of bail straight away.
(1) Bail – Object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative – Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that accused person will stand his trial when ....
Gravity alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail, rather competing factors are required to be balanced by court while exercising its discretion.
The court emphasized that the severity of the crime and potential interference with the investigation justify the denial of bail, aligning individual liberty with societal safety.
The presumption of innocence, the discretion of granting bail, and the need for a humane approach in bail decisions were central legal principles established in the judgment.
In double murder cases punishable by death, bail denied where prima facie circumstantial evidence establishes involvement, despite trial delay, emphasizing gravity of offence and punishment severity.
The court ruled that the seriousness of charges and ongoing risk to witnesses outweigh the defendant's custody length and medical claims, justifying bail denial.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
