Rajareddy vs The State
2021 Latest Caselaw 5279 Kant

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5279 Kant
Judgement Date : 2 December, 2021

Karnataka High Court

Rajareddy vs The State on 2 December, 2021

Bench: Mohammad Nawaz

                            1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                         BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

             CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1378 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

1.     RAJAREDDY
       S/O. GOVINDAREDDY
       AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
       R/AT BOGENAHALLI VILLAGE
       GUDIBANDE TALUK
       CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 207.

2.     NARASHIMAREDDY
       S/O. REAMAPPA
       AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
       R/AT BOGENAHALLI VILLAGE
       GUDIBANDE TALUK
       CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 207.
                                          ...APPELLANTS
       (BY SRI. B.V. PINTO, FOR
           SRI. RAJU C.N., ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.     THE STATE
       BY GUDIBANDE POLICE
       CHICKKABALLAPUR
       REPRESENTED BY SPP,
       HIGH COURT OR KARNATAKA
       BANGALORE-560 001.

2.     SMT. VENKATANARASAMMA
       W/O. VENAKTARAYAPPA
       AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
       R/AT GANDANAGENAHALLI VILLAGE
                            2

     GUDIBANDE TALUK
     CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 209.
                                  ... RESPONDENTS

      (BY SMT. LEENA C. SHIVAPURMATH, HCGP FOR R-1.
           R-2 IS SERVED.)

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14A(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE
APPELLANTS ON BAIL IN SPL.S.C.NO.24/2021 ON THE FILE
OF THE 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
CHIKKABALLAPURA, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.24/2021 OF
GUDIBANDE     POLICE, CHIKKABALLAPURA,    FOR   THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 114, 120-B AND
302 READ WITH 34 OF IPC AND 3(2)(v) AND 3(2)(va) OF
SC/ST (POA) ACT.

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION  THROUGH  VIDEO  CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING;

                     JUDGMENT

This appeal is preferred under section 14 A (2) of

the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, by accused Nos.2 and 3, praying to set

aside the order dated 04.06.2021 and to enlarge them

on bail in Cr.No.24/2021 of Gudibande Police Station.

2. Charge sheet has been filed against accused

Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections

114, 120(B), 302 R/w Section 34 of IPC, Section

3(2)(v)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015.

3. Heard both side and perused the material on

record.

4. Respondent No.2 has been served, but there is

no representation.

5. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that, on

account of political enmity and also for the reasons that

the deceased Lakshmi Narasimhappa had availed a sum

of Rs.50,000/- from accused No.2 Rajareddy, which was

not returned by him, the accused persons entered into a

conspiracy on 30.01.2021. At about 3.00 p.m to

eliminate him and in furtherance of the said conspiracy,

at the instigation of accused No.1, accused Nos.2 to 4

armed with lethal weapons, traveled in a motor cycle

bearing AP-02-AY-5841 and thereafter at about 4.15

p.m., accused No.2 secured deceased and brought him

near the tile factory, wherein accused Nos.3 and 4 as

well as accused No.2 assaulted him with the weapons

they were carrying and committed his murder.

6. The entire case is based on circumstantial

evidence, as there are no eye-witnesses to the incident

in question. The prosecution is relying on the recovery

effected at the instance of the accused persons such as

blood stained clothes, weapons and bike key.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant has

contended that similarly placed accused Nos.1 and 4

have been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble Court and

there are no sufficient materials to connect the

appellants with the alleged crime. He has contended that

the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the bail petition

considering the overtacts of the accused persons and

also on the ground that the charge sheet has been filed

against the accused and points out to the observations

made by the learned Sessions Judge that C.W.3-Anand

has stated that prior to the incident accused Nos.1 and 2

have traveled in a motor cycle towards the Brick Factory

and later on accused No.4 also came in a motor cycle at

about 3.30 P.M and went towards Varadhaiahgaripalli

village. He contends that the said circumstance is not an

incriminating circumstance to implicate the accused

persons, since there is no mention of deceased seen

along with the accused persons. He submits that the

appellants are arrested on 11.02.2021 and the charge

sheet is already filed. He submits, the appellants are

ready and willing to abide by any conditions. Accordingly,

seeks to allow the appeal.

8. The learned HCGP has opposed grant of bail to

the appellants contending that there are recovery of

incriminating articles and motive is also spoken by the

witnesses and therefore, in the event of grant of any

relief to the appellants, they may tamper with the

prosecution witnesses and also flee from justice.

9. Admittedly, there are no eye witnesses to the

incident in question. The case is based on circumstantial

evidence. Material on record discloses that certain

recoveries are made at the instance of the accused.

10. The learned Sessions Judge while dismissing

the petition has observed that filing of charge sheet

prima facie supports the case of prosecution that,

petitioners and other accused have committed heinous

offence and if they are released on bail, there are very

chances of tampering and threatening witnesses.

11. A co-ordinate bench of this Court in

Crl.A.No.917/2021 dated 30.08.2021 and in

Crl.A.No.770/2021, dated 23.10.2021 has allowed the

said appeal filed by accused Nos.1 and 4 and enlarged

them on bail.

12. The appellants are similarly placed. Filing of the

charge sheet itself will not lead to a conclusion that the

appellants are guilty of the offence alleged against them.

Prosecution has to establish its case in a full fledged trial.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this

Court has allowed the appeal preferred by accused Nos.1

and 4, by imposing conditions. Hence, the appellants

who are already arrested and interrogated and who are

in judicial custody are also entitled for the relief they

have sought. Accordingly, following;

ORDER

Appeal is allowed.

The order passed by the First Additional District and

Sessions Judge at Chikkaballapura, dated 04.06.2021 in

Cr.No.24/2021 of Gudibande Police Station is hereby set

aside. Appellants/accused Nos.2 and 3 are ordered to be

released on bail subject to following conditions::

1. The appellants shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each and providing two sureties each for likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.