1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2649/2021

BETWEEN:

SRI. MANJASHETTY @ DWARKI @ RAHUL,

S/O. BOREWELL NAGARAJU,

AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,

BARAGURU KOPPALA VILLAGE,

DADIGANAHALLI HOBLI,

CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK,

HASSAN DISTRICT.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S. MAHESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY,

CHANNARAYAPATNA RURAL POLICE STATION,

HASSAN DISTRICT,

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

BANGALORE – 560 001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER

SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE

PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN

CRIME

NO.128/2020

(S.C.

NO.18/2021)

OF

CHANNARAYAPATNA RURAL P.S., HASSAN DISTRICT

FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 302, 396 AND 120(B) OF

IPC.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR

ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

This petition is filed by petitioner/accused No.2

under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for granting him

anticipatory bail in Crime No.128/2020 registered by

Channarayapatna Rural Police for the offences

punishable under Sections 302 and 396 of Indian Penal

Code, 1860.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned High Court Government Pleader for

respondent – State.

3

3. The case of the prosecution is that on the

complaint of one Ramesha, who is the brother of the

deceased-Muralidhar filed a complaint on 30.08.2020

alleging that on 29.08.2020, deceased – Muralidhar

and his wife-Umadevi was found dead in the house and

the available gold ornaments and cash were looted by

some unknown persons and registered the case under

Sections 396 and 302 of IPC. During the investigation,

the police have arrested some of the accused persons

on 31.08.2020 and they were remanded to judicial

custody. The present petitioner was arrested on

31.08.2021 and shown as accused No.2 and there was

a recovery of cash of Rs.20,000/- from him and he has

approached the sessions Judge for bail, which came to

be rejected. Hence, he is before this Court.

4. Having heard the arguments of learned

counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court

4

Government Pleader it reveals that the accused Nos.1

to 6 were went near the garden house of the deceased,

where the deceased was staying along with his wife,

thinking that the deceased-Muralidhar has sold the land

for Rs.50 crores and presumed that huge amount was

kept in the house. For committing dacoity, they have

planned by making observation from 24.08.2020 till

28.08.2020 and on the night of 29.08.2020, they went

near the house of the deceased and the present

petitioner has called the deceased-Muralidhar by

standing outside that somebody is trying to steal the

tender coconut from the garden. Believing the version

of this petitioner, the deceased-Muralidhar came out

and at that time, accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5 have

surrounded and they have assaulted the deceased-

Muralidhar and also assaulted the wife of the deceased-

Muralidhar by closing the mouth and committed dacoity

of 316 gram of gold, 2250 grams of silver and

5

Rs.33,600/- of cash and also ATM cards from the house

thereafter, they took ATM card of the deceased-

Muralidhar and accused No.4 went to the Axis Bank

ATM and drawn the cash and thereafter, they went

away. During the investigation, the police seized three

chains weighing 85 grams was recovered from accused

No.1 and 231.16 gram of gold ornaments from accused

Nos.3, 4 and 5 and Rs.20,000/- was recovered from

the present petitioner/accused No.2.

5. Though the learned counsel for the

petitioner contended that there is no overt-act

attributable against the petitioner/accused No.2 except

calling the deceased from the house, nothing has been

elicited in the charge sheet. If a cash of Rs.20,000/- is

recovered, that cannot be said that t