1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JUNE 2019

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

CRIMINAL PETITION No.329/2019

Between:

Arunkumar @ Arul,

S/o Danial Pillappa,

Aged about 32 years,

R/at No.76, 3^rd Cross,

2^nd Main, Near Church,

Doresanipalya,

B.G. Road,

Bangalore – 560 068.

… Petitioner

(By Sri R.V. Rajashekara, Advocate)

And:

State of Karnataka by

Its Station House Office,

J.P. Nagar Police – 560 078,

Represented by

Its State Public Prosecutor,

High Court Building,

Bengaluru – 560 001.

… Respondent

(By Sri S. Rachaiah, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the

Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.

No.588/2013 of J.P. Nagar Police Station, Bangalore City for

the offences p/u/s 404, 449, 307, 302, 201, 403 of IPC.

2

This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day,

the Court, made the following:

ORDER

The petitioner has sought to be enlarged on bail in

connection with his detention in S.C.No.380/2014 for

the alleged offences punishable under Sections 404,

449, 307, 201, 402 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The facts that are made out by the prosecution

is as stated in column No.7 of the charge sheet. It is to

be noted that initially a complaint was filed without

naming any of the accused. Subsequently, after

investigation, charge sheet has been filed and it is

stated that the accused used to identify the house

where the solitary ladies were staying would mark and

trespass into such houses and he would murder ladies

and rob cash and ornaments. It is further stated that

on 1.9.2013, accused had gone to the house of CW.10

under the guise of repairing cable thereafter he had

3

gone to the house of CW.12 and the accused fled the

said house.

3. On 1.8.2018 it is stated that the accused after

having information that deceased was residing alone, at

about 7.15 p.m., went to the house of the deceased,

entered the house on some pretext and assaulted the

deceased with a knife and when her daughter CW.3

came into the room to help the deceased, he had

assaulted CW.3 as well. It is further stated that the

petitioner / accused had also stolen Samsung Galaxy

Mobile of the deceased. A complaint has come to be filed

in that regard.

4. It is stated that charge sheet has been filed. It

also to be noted that accused No.2 has been enlarged on

bail. It is further submitted that 25 witnesses have

examined including prime witness-CW.3 who is stated

to be the only witnesses who has seen the accused

allegedly committing the act of killing the deceased.

4

5. It is to be noted that the petitioner is in custody

since 8.9.2013. It is also to be noted that the evidence

of many of important witnesses are complete and more

importantly the evidence of CW.3 (PW-2) is complete.

Prima Facie there appears to be certain contradictions

in the evidence of CW.3 and in fact as pointed out by

the counsel for the petitioner, CW.3 in the cross

examination, has stated that the accused did not come

to the house of the deceased. However, the evidence

will have to be appreciated at the time of trial,

considering that the prime witness is a child (CW.3).

6. Taking note of fact that evidence of 25

witnesses most of whom are considered to be important

witnesses to support the story of the prosecution, is

complete, and also observing that there is no history of

criminal antecedents as against the petitioner and

proceedings in a bail cannot be treated to be

proceedings in the nature of punishment, without

5

getting into the weight of the evidence and the nature of

evidence of witnesses who have tendered evidence

before Court, the petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on

bail.

The

apprehension

regarding

tampering

the

witnesses at this stage is also to be appreciated taking

note of th