Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 906 (KAR)

Vinodha And Another v. State Of Karnataka

2020-05-26

K.SOMASHEKAR

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. This petition is filed by the petitioners who are arraigned as accused No.1 and 3 seeking regular bail in Crime No.35/2019 of Hanumanasagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 307, 504, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the State. 3. It is stated in the complaint filed by one Muttavva who is said to be the wife of deceased Devappa Olekar, wherein the deceased was serving earlier as a Conductor in KSRTC Unit. The deceased is said to have left the service of KSRTC and was residing in the house situated at Bilekal village along with his wife CW.1, who is his third wife. The deceased had earlier married his sisters daughters namely Hanumavva and Lalita. Due to difference of opinion in the family, he had deserted his first and second wife and subsequently got married with complainant Muttavva. The first and second wife were residing along with accused No.1 Vinodha Olekar at Bilekal village. The father of deceased Devappa Olekar had some landed properties and both wives of deceased Devappa Olekar were enjoying the said property for many years. They had not given any share to him. In this regard the deceased had asked his brother Vinoda and other family members to give his share in the landed property. In this regard, they had ill-will amongst them on account of partition demanded by the deceased. It is further stated that on 12.03.2019 at around 10.00 p.m., wherein the deceased along with his third wife, and CW.6 to 8 were sitting in front of their house on a pedestal at Bilekal village and they were talking to each other. At that point of time, accused Nos.1 to 16 went to the house of complainant by forming unlawful assembly and by holding deadly weapons such as wooden stick, size stone and other objects with a common object to eliminate deceased Devappa Olekar. The accused persons picked up quarrel with the deceased and there was an assault of incident took place between them. Accused Nos.1 to 3 said to have assaulted the deceased with means of wooden sticks on his knee part and also on his head and so also, assaulted the complainant on her right heel part causing bleeding injuries. The accused persons picked up quarrel with the deceased and there was an assault of incident took place between them. Accused Nos.1 to 3 said to have assaulted the deceased with means of wooden sticks on his knee part and also on his head and so also, assaulted the complainant on her right heel part causing bleeding injuries. Accused Nos.3 and 5 assaulted with the means of stone and all the accused took away the deceased to the open area of Kalingappa Ramaswamy and therein the accused were made to fall the deceased on the ground and gave kick over his person with their legs. As a result, deceased sustained grievous injuries on his person due to the assault made by the accused persons and last his breath. Subsequently, on a complaint filed by the complainant the case in Crime No.35/2019 came to be registered against the accused persons. The IO after conducting thorough investigation has laid the charge sheet against the accused before the committal court in C.C.No.717/2019. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that Accused No.7 Hanumavva who is none other than wife of deceased Devappa Olekar had also filed counter complaint against Accused persons in Crime No.36/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 323, 324, 341, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC. Accused No.1 to 7 in counter Crime No.36/2019 have already been released on bail. Further, the co-accused in Crime No.35/2019 have also been released on bail. The petitioners had filed anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. before the trial Court, the same came to be rejected. Further, petitioners and other co-accused filed Crl.P.No.101726/2019 before this Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail which came to be withdrawn in respect of these petitioners. 5. It is further contended by petitioners counsel that there was no intention, ill will, motive or preparation to commit alleged murder. He further contends that Accused No.2 and 4 against whom similar allegations of overt act are made, have been released on bail by the trial Court with subject to conditions stipulated therein. Therefore, on the ground of parity the present petitioners are also to be released on bail. It is his further submission that these petitioners surrendered before the JMFC, Kushtagi on 14.10.2019 and since then they are in judicial custody. 6. Therefore, on the ground of parity the present petitioners are also to be released on bail. It is his further submission that these petitioners surrendered before the JMFC, Kushtagi on 14.10.2019 and since then they are in judicial custody. 6. It is further submitted that there was no dispute about landed property between the petitioners and deceased Devappa Olekar as the partition took place long back. The petitioners were invited by the deceased to discuss regarding sharing of property with his wives who are Accused No.6 and 7 and they are released on bail. the petitioners have not committed any offences as alleged in the charge sheet. The petitioners are innocent and law abiding citizens and they have been falsely framed into the alleged offences. As the co-accused in counter case in Crime No.36/2019 are already released on bail, the petitioners are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. Further the investigation is completed and the charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners and they are no longer required for the purpose of further investigation and moreover they are in judicial custody since from the date of their surrender before the Magistrate. On all these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks for allowing this petition by enlarging the petitioners on regular bail. 7. Per contra, learned HCGP for respondent State has taken me through the averments made in the complaint filed by the complainant Muttavva, who is none other than the third wife of the deceased. The deceased has also got married his sisters daughter namely, Hanumavva and Lalitha before marrying her. The accused persons have committed the murder of the deceased Devappa Olekar by assaulting with means of wooden club and also sticks on his person and also made him fall on the ground by kicking over his person. In this case, the IO has thoroughly investigated the case and has laid the charge sheet in C.C.No.717/2019 against the accused persons. During the course of investigation the IO has recorded statement of witnesses and also drew the mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses. The accused are facing trial for the offences lugged against them in C.C.No.717/2019 by the Trial Court for committing the said case to the court of Sessions. During the course of investigation the IO has recorded statement of witnesses and also drew the mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses. The accused are facing trial for the offences lugged against them in C.C.No.717/2019 by the Trial Court for committing the said case to the court of Sessions. Moreover, these accused have already approached this Court in Crl.P.No.101726/2019 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. which came to be withdrawn in respect of the petitioners. He contends that in view of the gravity of the offence, the accused persons do not deserve to be released on bail. On all these grounds he seeks for dismissal of the bail petition filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3. 8. It is in this context, it is relevant to refer to the FIR said to have been recorded by the police and also allegations made in the complaint filed by the complainant who is none other than the third wife of the deceased Devappa Olekar. The case in Crime No.35/2019 came to be registered based upon the complaint and also the counter case came to be registered in Crime No.36/2019 Both the crimes were taken up for investigation by the IO and charge sheet came to be laid against the accused persons in C.C.No.717/2019 arising out of Cr.No.35/2019. The charge sheet consists statement of witnesses and also the mahazar which has been drawn in the presence of panch witnesses relating to the offences committed by the accused at the relevant point of time. Therefore, it is said that once the charge sheet has been laid, it is inferred that sufficient materials have been secured by the IO in order to lay the charge-sheet. But, it cannot be said that there are enough materials to decline the relief of bail, as sought for by these petitioners who are arraigned as Accused Nos.1 and 3 in Crime No.35/2019. The prosecution is required to prove the guilt of accused relating to the role made by them in eliminating deceased Devappa Olekar. Moreover, the co-accused in Crime No.35/2019 and counter case in Crime No.36/2019 are already released on bail with subject to conditions stipulated therein. Therefore, it is said that there are substance in the contention of the counsel for the petitioners only for seeking relief of bail. Moreover, the co-accused in Crime No.35/2019 and counter case in Crime No.36/2019 are already released on bail with subject to conditions stipulated therein. Therefore, it is said that there are substance in the contention of the counsel for the petitioners only for seeking relief of bail. Whereas in the present case on hand, it is necessary to state that the court should avoid elaborate documentation of merits while dealing with a petition for bail. The court cannot go into the details of the material evidence to find out whether the evidence will be sufficient in establishing the guilt of the accused, as it is not a relevant consideration at this stage to ascertain the probability or improbability of the prosecution case as put forth. Hence, detailed examination of the material evidence and so also elaborate documents of merits is not desirable at this stage and it should be avoided while passing an order on bail petitions. But in the present case on hand, though it is a successive bail petition filed by the accused, it is necessary in respect of the satisfaction about the prima facie case and not an exhaustive exploration of merits in the order itself. Therefore, it is said that what is necessary is the satisfaction about the prima facie case for which the I.O. has facilitated collection of materials in order to lay the charge-sheet against the accused. But in fact it is necessary to state that realism is a component of humanism which is the heart of the legal system. Further, the court shall not drag into minute details in an arena of speculation to suppress the material circumstances though at this stage the material evidence would not be considered in the sense of the terms. Therefore, it is said that there are substance in the contention of the counsel for the petitioner/accused for seeking the relief of bail by urging various grounds and also based upon the material evidence collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as in the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner/accused deserves to be granted bail in respect of the present successive bail petition for the grounds urged. 9. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as in the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner/accused deserves to be granted bail in respect of the present successive bail petition for the grounds urged. 9. However, learned HCGP submits that if the petitioners are supposed to be released on bail, certainly they would come in the way of prosecution case and destroy the evidence. This apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as in the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 deserve for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition filed by petitioners under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions: i) Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 shall execute bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each, with likesum surety to the satisfaction of the committal court in C.C.No.717/2019 relating to Crime No.35/2019 of Hanumasagar Police Station; ii) Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 shall not tamper or hamper the case of prosecution witnesses. iii) Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 shall appear before the court of law on all the dates of hearing without fail. iv) Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall not leave the jurisdiction of Koppal District without prior permission from the competent court of law. v) Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 shall not indulge in any other criminal activities henceforth; If Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 violate any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stand ceased.