Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Kar) 330

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J.
Sri Amit Digvekar S/O Ramachandra Bikaji Degwekar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Petition No.927 of 2023 (439) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9417 OF 2023 (439) CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9465 OF 2023 (439)
Decided on : 16-07-2024

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI BASAVARAJ SAPPANNAVAR.K. & SRI K. CHANDRA MOHAN, ADVOCATES
For the Respondent: SRI NAIK ASHOK NARAYAN, SPL. PP.

IMPORTANT POINT
Prolonged incarceration and delay in trial can justify the grant of bail, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Headnote:
Bail - Murder Conspiracy - IPC Sections 302, 120B, 118, 203, 35; Indian Arms Act Sections 25(1), 27(1); Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act Sections 3(1)(i), 3(2), 3(3), 3(4) - The court emphasized the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution, considering the prolonged incarceration of the accused and the slow pace of the trial.
Fact of the Case:
The accused were charged with conspiracy and murder related to the death of a journalist. They sought bail after being in custody for over six years, arguing that the trial was delayed and they were not the actual assailants.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the significant delay in the trial, with only 130 out of 527 witnesses examined, and emphasized the importance of the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Issues: Whether the accused should be granted bail considering the prolonged incarceration and the slow progress of the trial.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that prolonged incarceration without a timely trial violates the right to life and liberty under Article 21, warranting the grant of bail despite the serious nature of the charges.
Result: The petitions for bail were allowed, and the accused were granted bail with conditions.

ORDER :

1. Accused Nos.5, 7 & 17 in Special.C.C.No.872/2018 pending before the Court of Principal City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru arising out of Crime No.221/2017 registered by Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B, 118, 203 and 35 IPC, Sections 25(1) and 27(1) of the Indian Arms Act, 1959 and Sections 3(1)(i), 3(2), 3(3) and 3(4) of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act, 2000 (for short ‘COCA Act’) are before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Facts leading to filing of these petitions as revealed from the records are as follows:

Based on the complaint filed by CW.1, the Station House Officer of Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru had registered FIR in Crime No.221/2017 against unknown persons for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

4. Complainant/Kavitha Lankesh – CW.1 had averred in the complaint that deceased Gouri Lankesh, who was her sister, was a journalist and a progressive thinker and was residing alone in a house at Rajarajeshwari Nagar. She was often visiting the house of the complainant to meet her mother Indira Lankesh. A week prior to the date of the complaint, deceased Gouri Lankesh had come to the house of the complainant and informed her that somebody was moving around her house in a suspicious manner. On 05.09.2017 at about 2.00 p.m., complainant had gone to the office of the deceased at Gandhi Bazaar and had met her. At about 8.26 p.m. on 05.09.2017, when the complainant and her mother Indira Lankesh were at home, somebody telephoned her and informed that something had happened to Gouri Lankesh in her house. Immediately, complainant went near the house of Gouri Lankesh and saw that her car bearing registration No.KA-5/MR-3782 was parked in front of the gate, which was partially open. The complainant saw that her sister was lying in a pool of blood and besides her body cartridge pieces were found. She suspected that somebody had shot dead her sister and escaped. Accordingly, she approached the police at about 10.00 p.m. on 05.09.2017 and lodged a complaint, which had resulted in registering FIR in Crime No.221/2017 against unknown persons.

5. During the course of investigation, accused No.5 was arrested on 21.05.2018, accused No.7 was arrested on 25.07.2018 and accused No.17 was arrested on 02.3.2018. The investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. In the charge sheet, the petitioners herein are arrayed as accused Nos.5, 7 and 17 respectively. The bail application filed by them before the Trial Court in Special C.C.No.872/2018 was rejected. Therefore, they are before this Court.

6. Learned counsel for the accused No.5 submits that accused No.5 was arrested on the basis of the voluntary statement of accused No.1. The allegation against accused No.5 is about financing the other accused persons. He had no criminal antecedents prior to his arrest in the present case. After his arrest, he has been falsely implicated in other criminal cases. There is no seizure from him in the present case. He was not part of any conspiracy nor was he present in the spot of crime. He is in custody for the last more than six years. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

7. Learned counsel for the accused No.7 submits that the allegation against accused No.7 is about tracing the address of deceased Gouri Lankesh and providing the same to accused No.15. It is further alleged that accused No.7 had identified places to hide the arms and he had given shelter to accused Nos.1 and 15 at Sigehalli and after the crime was committed, he had harboured accused Nos.2, 3 and 6. He submits that accused No.7 has no criminal antecedents and he was working as a teacher in a private school. He submits that accused No.11 has been granted regular bail by this Court on the ground of his long incarceration and prays tha