Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 42774
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL PETITION No.102405/2021
BETWEEN:
1. MALLIKRIHAN ALIAS RIHAN
S/O. ALLABAKSHA CHOUDARI
AGE. 19 YEARS
OCC. LABOURER,
R/O. KHADARBAG ONI,
SAVANUR, HAVERI DIST
2. MADARSAB ALIAS ABEDHA
S/O. ALLABAKSHA CHOUDARI
AGE. 23 YEARS
OCC. MECHANIC,
R/O. KHADARBAG ONI,
SAVANUR, HAVERI DIST
3 .
JAFARSAB ALIAS TANVEER
S/O. ALLABAKSHA CHOUDARI
AGE. 26 YEARS
OCC. CAR DRIVER,
R/O. KHADARBAG ONI,
SAVANUR, HAVERI DIST
4 .
AYUB BEG MAHABUB BEG MIRJA
S/O. MAHAB BEG MIRJA
AGE. 22 YEARS
OCC. SHOPKEEPER,
R/O. LAKHSAR BAJAR ONI,
SAVANUR, HAVERI DIST
…PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI RAVI B.NAIK, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SHRI J.BASAVARAJ AND
2
SHRI T.R.PATIL, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH SAVANOOR P.S
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENCH AT DHARWAD-580011
…RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI RAMESH B.CHIGARI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION, GRANT REGULAR BAIL IN
CR.NO.161/2021 REGISTERED BY SAVANOOR POLICE STATION,
HAVERI DISTRICT, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES U/S 143,
147, 120B, 201, 148, 302 R/W 149 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF
PRINCIPAL
CIVIL
JUDGE
(JR.DN)
AND
JMFC
COURT,
SAVANOOR, HAVERI IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER NOS.1 TO
4/ACCUSED NOS.2 TO 5 ARE CONCERNED ONLY PENDING
TRIAL OF THE CASE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
In cases involving serious offenses, bail may be granted to accused persons who are not directly involved in the commission of the offense and who pose no risk of tampering with evidence or witnesses.
Headnote:
BAIL - SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. - [PETITIONER] - Petitioners 2 to 4/accused Nos.3 to 5 were granted bail subject to stringent conditions, while the petition filed by petitioner No.1/accused No.2 was rejected.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were accused of murder and other offenses under Sections 143, 147, 148, 120B, 302, 201 read with Section 149 of IPC. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners, along with accused No.1, formed an unlawful assembly and murdered the deceased by assaulting him with lethal weapons.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was a prima facie case against the petitioners based on the statements of eyewitnesses who implicated them in the murder. However, the court also noted that the petitioners 2 to 4/accused Nos.3 to 5 were not attributed with any overt acts of assault against the deceased.
Issues: Whether the petitioners were entitled to bail considering the nature and gravity of the offenses charged against them.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners 2 to 4/accused Nos.3 to 5 could be granted bail subject to stringent conditions, as there was no evidence of their direct involvement in the assault that led to the deceased's death.
Final Decision: The petition filed by petitioner No.1/accused No.2 was rejected, while the petition filed by petitioners 2 to 4/accused Nos.3 to 5 was allowed subject to the following conditions: (i) execution of a personal bond of Rs.1 lakh each with two sureties; (ii) furnishing proof of residential address and informing the court of any change in address; (iii) refraining from tampering with prosecution witnesses or indulging in criminal activities; and (iv) appearing before the trial court on all dates of hearing.
This petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. by accused Nos.2 to 5 to enlarge them on
bail in Cr.No.161/2021 of Savanur police station,
Haveri district.
2.
Charge-sheet
has
been
filed
against
accused Nos.1 to 5 for offences punishable under
3
Sections 143, 147, 148, 120B, 302, 201 read with
Section 149 of IPC.
3.
Heard Shri Ravi B.Naik, learned Senior
Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri
Ramesh B.Chigari, learned High Court Government
Pleader for respondent/State and perused the
material on record.
4.
It is the case of prosecution that on
account of previous enmity, on 08.08.2021 at
about 6 p.m., all the accused formed an unlawful
assembly armed with lethal weapons like chopper,
axe etc., and surrounded the car of the deceased
and assaulted him indiscriminately, all over his
body and committed his murder.
5.
Complaint
was
lodged
by
one
Mahmadgous Momin, father of the deceased, by
name Hazrath Ali @ Anwar. On receiving the
information regarding the murder of his son, he
4
went to the spot and came to know from the
people gathered there that the dead body of his
son has been shifted to Savanur Government
Hospital. As such, he went to the hospital and
saw the dead body of his son and thereafter
lodged the complaint, on the basis of which, case
was registered against accused No.1.
6.
It is the contention of Shri Ravi B.Naik,
learned
Senior
Counsel
that
in
the
First
Information Report, only the name of accused
No.1 is found and according to the first informant,
the people who had gathered at the spot informed
him that his son was murdered by accused No.1.
Therefore, he contends that the petitioners who
are now arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 5 are
innocent and they are falsely implicated, on the
basis of the statements of the alleged eye-
witnesses,
whose
statements
are
recorded
belatedly. He would further contend that the
5
deceased is a rowdy element and he was pestering
accused No.1 and his family members and there
are
chances
that
he
was
having
number
of
enemies
and
therefore,
the
statements
of
eyewitnesses
which
is
recorded
belatedly
implicating the petitioners cannot be taken into
consideration,
as
false
implication
of
the
petitioners is not ruled out, since the deceased
was also troubling the petitioners and his family
members. He submits that now the investigation
is completed and charge-sheet has been filed and
therefore,
by
imposing
any
conditions,
the
petitioners may be enlarged on bail as they are
ready and willing to abide by any conditions that
may be imposed by this Court and they will also
undertake
to
appear
before
the
trial
court
regularly.
7.
Learned High Court Government Pleader
has opposed the petition contending that the
6
offence committed is very heinous in nature and in
view of the statements of the eye-witnesses, there
is a prima facie case against the petitioners. He
contends that keeping in view the nature and
gravity of the offence committed, the petitioners
are not entitled for the relief and in the event they
are enlarged on bail, there are chances of they
tampering the prosecution witnesses.
8.
The incident took place on 08.08.2021
at about 6 p.m. near Karadagi cross in Savanur
town,
Haveri
district.
Admittedly,
the
first
informant, the father of the deceased is not an
eye-witness to the incident in question. He
received the information at about 7 p.m. on
08.08.2021 that his son has been murdered, as
such, he went to the spot, wherein the people who
had gathered at the spot informed him that
accused
No.1
namely
Imran
@
Bablu
s/o
Allabhaksh committed the murder of his son.
7
9.
In
the
course
of
investigation,
the
statements of the eye-witnesses namely CWs-8 to
11 have been recorded. The contention of the
learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners is that
the statements of the eye-witnesses are recorded
belatedly and therefore, false implication of the
petitioners
cannot
be
ruled
out
because
the
petitioners 1 to 3 are the brothers of accused
No.1. It is his contention that the na
