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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 57380

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101678/2022

BETWEEN:

SHRI. SURAJ S/O. PUNDALIK KEDARICHE,

AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK,

R/O. PATIL GALLI, VADAGAON, BELAGAVI.

NOW AT 4TH CROSS, NAZAR CAMP, VADAGAON,

TQ: BELAGAVI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. ANAND DESAI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

THROUGH THE POLICE INSPECTOR,

SHAHAPUR, POLICE STATION,

DIST: BELAGAVI.

REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT BUILDING,

DHARWAD.

... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V.MOGALI, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439

OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL

IN CRIME NO.54/2021 (SC NO.196/2021) REGISTERED UNDER

SECTIONS 341 AND 302 OF IPC IN CONNECTION WITH

SHAHAPUR POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI, PENDING ON THE FILE

2

OF VIII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELGAVI SO

FAR AS PETITIONER/ACCUSED IS CONCERNED.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS

DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

This petition is filed by the sole accused under

Section 439 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(hereinafter referred to as the 8Cr.P.C.9, for brevity)

seeking bail in Crime No.54/2021 of Shahapura Police

Station, registered for the offences punishable under

Sections

341

and

302

of

The

Indian

Penal

Code

(hereinafter referred to as the 8IPC9, for brevity) (pending

in SC No.196/2021 on the file of the learned VIII

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi).

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, one Sri.

Sandeep Maruti Kundekar has lodged a compliant stating

that he is residing along with his wife and his sister Shilpa

who is married to one Manoj Hanamant Gavaskar and she

is residing in house of her husband at Goundwad. The

3

complainant use to do the work of preparing 8Tayat9 in his

house

and

his

mother9s

brother

by

name

Mahadev

(deceased) is residing along with his family members at

Ambewadi.

The

deceased

Mahadev

and

the

petitioner/accused were doing mason work under one

Mohan Laxman Khannukar. The said deceased Mahadev

used to drink liquor everyday and his wife used to quarrel

with him as such he used to sleep in the house of

complainant and used to visit Ambewadi whenever there

was no work. On that day on account of Mangayi fair the

deceased Mahadev was in the house of the complainant.

On that day at about 07:30 hours he went out and at

about 10:00 a.m. Mohan Laxman Khannukar informed over

phone to the mother of the complainant that somebody

murdered Mahadev near the rickshaw stand at Yallur Road

cross. Then the complainant along with his mother went

near Netaji Subhashchandra rickshaw stand and saw dead

body of Mahadev fallen, with injury over his neck. On

enquiring the public, it was revealed that at about 09:15

hours quarrel was taken place between the petitioner and

4

the deceased Mahadev over money transaction and at that

time the petitioner has assaulted Mahadev with radium

cutter blade over his neck and when Mahadev fell down

with heavy bleeding injury the petitioner ran away. The

said complaint came to be registered in Shahapur Police

Station in Crime No.54/2021 for the offence punishable

under Section 302 of IPC. The petitioner came to be

arrested on 02.08.2021 and he is in judicial custody. The

petitioner filed bail application in Crl. Misc. No.1386/2021

and the same came to be rejected by the learned VIII

Additional District & Sessions Judge, Belagavi by order

dated 21.12.2021. Therefore, the petitioner is before this

Court seeking bail.

3.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court

Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

4.

It would be the contention of the learned

counsel for the petitioner that the alleged incident has

occurred on 02.08.2021 at about 09:00 a.m. and the

5

complaint came to be filed at 01:00 p.m. on the same day

and there is delay in filing the complaint. The alleged

eyewitnesses stated in the charge sheet are all relatives

of the deceased. There is no motive and the alleged

incident has occurred in a sudden quarrel between the

deceased

and

the

petitioner/accused.

The

petitioner/accused is in judicial custody since the day he

was arrested and as charge sheet is filed, he is not

required for any custodial interrogation. With this, he

prayed for allowing the petition.

5.

Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader would contend that, the offences alleged against

the petitioner are heinous offences punishable with death

or imprisonment for life. CW-4 to 10 are eyewitnesses to

the

incident

who

have

seen

the

petitioner/accused

assaulting the deceased with radium cutter blade on the

neck

of

the

deceased.

The

statement

of

these

eyewitnesses has also been recorded under Section 164 of

Cr.P.C.

The

Doctor

who

conducted

post

mortem

6

examination over the dead body of the deceased has given

a final opinion that the death has occurred due to

hamorrhagic shock as a result of transection of vessels of

neck caused by sharp cutting

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