Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1194 (KAR)

Sharanu S/o Anand Pujari v. State of Karnataka

2017-09-01

N.K.SUDHINDRARAO

body2017
ORDER : Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent Police. 2. The petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.88/2017 of University Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 364, 302, 201, 109 R/W Section 149 of IPC. 3. The complaint is lodged by one ShivarayCW.1 and the victim is Malappa. One Hanmanth Pujari is the senior uncle of accused No.1. Accused Nos.1, 5 to 12 were nurturing enmity against CW.1 and were instigating accused No.1 to kill the son of CW.1Malappa. On 08.03.2017 at about 900 p.m., accused Nos.1 to 3 formed assembly to commit offence along with accused No.4 who brought Malappa and induced him to consume liquor and all of them went in an Auto bearing registration No.KA32/3003 and accused Nos.1 to 4 with an intention and planed to take life of Malappa. Accused No.1 stabbed Malappa with knife on the stomach and caused serious injuries and accuse No.2 took out the stone and hit Malappa on his head and accused No.3 slapped near the neck of Malappa, because of which Malappa fell down on the ground and died. 4. The learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the petitioner in this case is one Sharanu accused No.2 and in so far as the charge sheet is concerned, there are twelve accused. The learned counsel would further submit that accused Nos.3 and 4 and other persons were on bail. Considering the offences and sequence of incident stated in the final report. The petitioner is said to be in judicial custody from 11.04.2017. 5. The learned counsel would submit that accused have got information that the case might have committed to the District Court. However, in the context and circumstance of the case, it may not be just and proper to enlarge the accused on bail at this stage. However, the petitioner is given liberty to file another application after conclusion of the stage of hearing before charge. The petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed.