Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 990 (KAR)

Santhosh S. G. v. State of Karnataka

2022-08-01

K.NATARAJAN

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. These petition are filed by the petitioner-accused Nos.1 and 2 under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C., for granting anticipatory bail in Crime No. 47/2020 registered by Kalasa Police Station, Chikkamagaluru District, for the offence punishable under Sec. 306 of IPC on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.M.F.C. at Mudigere. 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Sujith Kumar son of the deceased Narayana filed complaint the police on 25/12/2022 alleging that his father Narayana said to have borrowed Rs.20,000.00 from the petitioner/accused No.1 Santosh and he was insisting to repay the same continuously and was demanding to return the money. That on 23/12/2022 when his father was coming on road accused No.1 said to have slapped on his cheek and demanded the money back, otherwise he will commit the murder of the family members. Later one Vishwa rescued his father and brought his father back. On 25/12/2020 when the deceased son and the deceased wife went out of the house, his father committed suicide because of the abetment made by this petitioner/accused No.1. Hence, the complaint came to be registered and police are making hectic effort to arrest this petitioners. They have approached the Sessions Judge for granting anticipatory bail, which came to be rejected. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated. There is two days delay in lodging complaint and except demanding to repay the money, there is no harassment by the petitioners. There is no specific allegation against the petitioners. Therefore, he contends that the petitioners are entitled for bail and are ready to abide by any conditions. Hence prayed for granting bail. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP objected the bail petition mainly on the ground that since last 1 1/2 years they are absconding and not available for investigation. Therefore objected for bail petition prayed for rejecting the bail petition. 6. Upon hearing the arguments and perused the records, which reveals ofcourse the complaint came to be filed on 25/12/2020 after commission of the suicide by the father of the complainant. Therefore objected for bail petition prayed for rejecting the bail petition. 6. Upon hearing the arguments and perused the records, which reveals ofcourse the complaint came to be filed on 25/12/2020 after commission of the suicide by the father of the complainant. The incident took place on 23/12/2022 when the accused No.1 demanded to pay Rs.20,000.00 back and he is said to have assaulted and insulted him. Though, the complaint came to be registered in December 2020, the police not shown any interest to arrest the petitioner and he is said to be absconding. However, the case came to be registered only after the death note said to have been left by the deceased stating that these two petitioners are responsible for his suicide. But there is no specific overtact or allegation made against them, except the death note stating that they are the cause for his suicide. The incident took place one and half years back, till then the police did not show any interest to investigate the matter and the said FSL report is also stated to be received confirming the hand writing of the deceased. Considering the facts and circumstances, by imposing certain stringent conditions, if bail is granted, no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution. Considering the facts and circumstances, by imposing certain stringent conditions, if bail is granted, no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution. Hence, the following ORDER The respondent - Police is directed to release the petitioners No.1 and 2 on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 47/2020 registered by Kalasa Police Station, Chikkamagaluru District, for the offence punishable under Sec. 306 of IPC on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.M.F.C. at Mudigere, subject to the following conditions: (i) Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 (Rupees One Lakhs only) each, with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer; (ii) Petitioners shall surrender themselves before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order; (iii) Petitioners shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses; (iv) Petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offences; (v) Petitioners shall be deemed custody for the purpose of any recovery under Sec. 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; (vi) Petitioners shall mark their attendance before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. on every Monday for a period of two months or till filing of charge-sheet whichever is earlier.