Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1939 (KAR)

Vittal Shamba Karoli v. State Of Karnataka

2020-09-30

SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

body2020
JUDGMENT Shivashankar Amarannavar, J. - This criminal petition is filed by the petitionersaccused Nos.1 to 6, 8 & 9 under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying to release them on anticipatory bail in Crime No.170/2020 of Raibag Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 323, 324, 326, 354B, 307, 504, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution is that one Smt.Shala W/o Sidram Karoli had lodged the complaint alleging that on 17.07.2020 at 6.30 a.m, the present petitioners and five others came to their agricultural land and they raised objections regarding boundary disputes of their lands, they alleged to have came wielding sticks, clubs and other weapons to her agricultural land and started abusing her in filthy language and altogether forming unlawful assembly started picking up quarrel with complainant and her family members and individually manhandled each and every member of her family and caused injuries to them by assaulting with clubs, sticks, stones etc., the elders of the vicinity one Mahantesh Mane and Bharat Gurav came to the spot listening to the hue and cry made by the complainant s family. The petitioners threatened the complainant s family with dire consequences and went away. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.170/2020 at 18.30 hrs for the aforesaid offences before the Raibag Police. 3. The petitioner No.4-accused No.4 came to be arrested during the pendency of this petition and therefore, the petition filed by him came to be dismissed as not pressed. 4. The petitioners had approached the trial Court seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected by V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi by order dated 17.08.2020. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court seeking bail. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and also the learned HCGP for the respondent-State. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case involves case and counter case. The present petitioner No.4 - accused No.4 has filed a complaint in Crime No.169/2020 against the complainant and others for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 324, 326, 307, 341, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC. It is his further submission that there is a boundary dispute between accused family and complainant s family and there was a free fight between both the sides and both parties have sustained injuries. It is his further submission that there is a boundary dispute between accused family and complainant s family and there was a free fight between both the sides and both parties have sustained injuries. It is his further submission that who is the aggressor is a matter of investigation and trial. It is his further submission that the injured have been discharged from the hospital. It is his further submission that investigation is on the verge of it s completion. With this he prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, the learned HCGP has contended that there is a specific overt act of each of the accused assaulting with sickle and causing injuries. It is her further submission that Smt.Shala W/o Sidram Karoli sustained one grievous and one simple injury. It is her further submission that investigation is in progress and if petitioners are granted with anticipatory bail, they will hamper the investigation and tamper prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this she prays to reject the petition. 8. Having regard to the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP, this Court has gone through the FIR and Complaint of crime No.169/2020 and crime No.170/2020. 9. In Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) AIR SC 312 , the Hon ble Supreme Court after analyzing various previous judgments and guidelines, has enumerated the following factors and parameters that can be taken into consideration by courts while dealing with the anticipatory bail: (i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made; (ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; (iv) The possibility of the accused s likelihood to repeat similar or other offences; (v) Where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her; (vi) Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people; (vii) The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The cases in which the accused is implicated with the help of sections 34 and 149 of the Penal code, 1860, the court should consider with even greater care and caution because over-implication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern; (viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors, namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation, and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused; (ix) The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant; (x) Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail, and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail. 10. As per the averments of the complaint, there is a boundary dispute between petitioners and the complainant s family members. Due to the said boundary disputes, there was a free fight between petitioners-accused and the complainant s family and complaint has been filed by the petitioner-accused No.4 and the same is came to be registered in Crime No.169/2020 of Raibag Police Station. Subsequent to that the complainant has filed complaint against the petitioners and others and it is registered in Crime No.170/2020 of Raibag Police Station. Therefore, the case involves case and counter case and there was a free fight between both the parties. Both the parties have sustained injuries. Injured have been discharged from the hospital. Who is the aggressor is a matter of investigation and trial. Except the offence under Section 307 of IPC other offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for the life. As the injured have been discharged from the hospital, there is no danger to their life. The injuries sustained are not on vital part. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners-accused. Except the offence under Section 307 of IPC other offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for the life. As the injured have been discharged from the hospital, there is no danger to their life. The injuries sustained are not on vital part. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners-accused. The main objection of the prosecution is that in the event of grant of bail, petitioners are going to hamper the investigation and tamper prosecution witnesses and the same is set right by imposing some stringent conditions. 11. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for grant of anticipatory bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER Criminal petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. In the event of arrest, petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3, 5, 6, 8 and 9 are ordered to be released on bail in connection with Crime No.170/2020 of Raibag Police Station with the following conditions: I. Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. II. Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from today. III. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required. IV. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer. V. The petitioners shall not obstruct or hamper the Police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to collected by the Police. VI. The petitioners shall regularly remain present during the trial and co-operate with the Court for early disposal of the case registered against them.