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) 61197

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200004/2022

BETWEEN:

Rahul Bhavikatti S/o Rajkumar Bhavikatti,

Age : 21 years, Oc : Labour,

R/o Madkatti Village,

R/at Morambi Village,

Tq : Bhalki, Dist : Bidar.

(Petitioner No.1/Accused No.5

as per charge-sheet)

… Petitioner

(By Sri Rajesh Doddamani, Advocate)

AND:

The State of Karnataka,

Through Khatak Chincholi Police Station,

Now represented by the

Additional State Public Prosecutor,

High Court of Karnataka,

Kalaburagi Bench.

… Respondent

(By Sri Sharanabasappa M.Patil, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C. praying to allow this petition and release the

2

petitioner/accused No.5 as per charge sheet on bail in

connection with the Crime No.12/2020 of Khatak Chincholi

Police Station registered for the offences punishable under

Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 302 and

201 r/w 149 of IPC now pending on the file of the Hon'ble

District and Sessions Judge, Bidar in S.C.No.77/2021.

This petition coming on for Orders this day, the

Court made the following:

An accused charged with offences under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of IPC is entitled to bail, even if other accused in the same case are charged with the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

Headnote:

BAIL - SECTION 302 IPC - [ACCUSED CHARGED UNDER SECTION 323 AND 324 IPC IS ENTITLED TO BAIL]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was arrested in connection with a murder case and was charged with offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 302 and 201 read with Section 149 of IPC. The petitioner filed a bail application before the High Court, contending that he was only liable for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of IPC and not Section 302 of IPC.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court allowed the bail application, holding that the petitioner was entitled to bail as per the charge-sheet, which showed that he was only liable for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of IPC. The Court also noted that accused Nos.3 and 4, who were charged with the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, had also been granted bail by the Court.

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail considering the charges against him.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail as per the charge-sheet, which showed that he was only liable for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of IPC. The Court also noted that accused Nos.3 and 4, who were charged with the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, had also been granted bail by the Court.

Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on bail subject to certain conditions.

Heard Sri Rajesh Doddamani, learned counsel for the

petitioner and learned HCGP Sri Gururaj V.Hasilkar for

respondent/State.

2.

The present petition is filed under Section 439

of Cr.P.C with the following prayer :-

To

allow

the

petition

and

the

petitioner/accused No.5 as per charge sheet

on bail in connection with the Crime

No.12/2020

of

Khatak

Chincholi

Police

Station

registered

for

the

offences

punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147,

148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 302 and 201 r/w

149 of IPC now pending on the file of the

Hon'ble District and Sessions Judge, Bidar in

S.C.No.77/2021.

3

3.

Brief facts of the case are as under :-

A complaint came to be lodged on 31.12.2020

contending that on 26.12.2020 at about 6.30 p.m. younger

brother of the complainant Ravi left Madakatti village and

did not returned back and at about 8.30 p.m. when he

telephoned to him and told him to return home. He has

told that he will finish his dinner and return home little

later. Subsequent thereto, when he did not returned,

complainant again called him but there was no response

and mobile phone of his younger brother was switched off.

Thereafter, he searched for his younger brother in the

village and neighboring village but his younger brother was

not found. Accordingly, a missing complaint came to be

lodged. On 30.12.2021 at about 8.30 p.m. Katack

Chincholi police telephoned to him and told that there is a

dead body in the forest area he was required to visit the

forest to identify the dead body. Accordingly, himself, his

mother Renuka together went to the police station and

from there they visited the forest area and there they

found a dead body and they identified that it is the dead

4

body of his younger brother Ravi and lodged a complaint

for taking action. Police after registering of the case in

Crime No.109/2020, were in investigation and later on

they found five persons were responsible for the death of

Ravi including the petitioner and they filed a charge-sheet

before the court for the offences punishable under Sections

143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 302 and 201 read

with Section 149 of IPC against accused Nos.1 to 4 and so

also Section 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504 and 506

read with Section 149 of IPC for accused No.5 (for the

present petitioner).

4.

Accused No.5/petiioner is in custody since

24.06.2021. He applied for bail before the District Court

which was rejected. Therefore, he has approached this

court for grant of bail.

5.

Sri Rajesh Doddamani learned counsel for the

petitioner contends that even according to the prosecution

as per the charge-sheet in column No.17 this present

petitioner is liable for the offences punishable under

5

Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of IPC and not

Section 302 of IPC. Therefore, the present petitioner is

entitled for grant of bail. Despite in column No.17 showing

that accused/present petitioner is only liable for the

offence as aforesaid, he has been detained in the custody

and therefore sought for grant of bail.

6.

Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader opposes the bail petition. He has also contended

that accused/petitioner is liable for the offence punishable

under Section 302 of IPC. In reply, learned counsel

Sri Rajesh Doddamni also contend that the statement of

the objections filed by the prosecution is to be considered,

this Court has granted bail to accused Nos.3 and 4 by

order dated 30.07.2021 and therefore present petition is

also entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity.

7.

This court perused the material on record.

Admittedly,

as

per

charge-sheet

in column No.17,

accused/present petitioner is charge sheeted for the

offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148,

6

323, 324, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.

Moreover, accused Nos.3, 4 who have charge-sheeted for

the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, they

have also been granted bail by this Court.

8.

Keeping note of these aspects of the matter

without holding a mini trial on me

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