Karnataka High Court
Lalasab S/O Appalal Mulla vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 16 February, 2022
Bench: V Srishananda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200153/2021 C/W.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200134/2021
IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200153/2021:
BETWEEN:
LALSAB, S/O. APPALAL MULLA
AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. ARJANAL, TQ: CHADACHAN
DIST: VIJAYAPUR - 586 125 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI SHIVANAND V. PATTANASHETTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY ADDL. SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH - 585 106
(THROUGH ZALAKI P.S.,
DIST: VIJAYAPUR - 586 125)
2. RAVIKANT
S/O. HARISCHANDRA RATHOD
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER
R/O ARJANAL, TQ: INDI
DIST: VIJAYAPUR - 586 124 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA M PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED)
2
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14-A OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES
(PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.10.2020
PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.835/2020 BY THE II ADDL.
SESSIONS JUDGE AT VIJAYAPUR AND ETC.
IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200134/2021:
BETWEEN:
RUKMANNA
S/O. NARAYAN ALAGUNDAGI
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O ARJANAL, TQ: CHADACHAN
DIST: VIJAYAPUR - 586 123 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI SHIVANAND V. PATTANASHETTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY ADDL. SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH - 585 106
(THROUGH ZALAKI P.S.,
DIST: VIJAYAPUR - 586 121)
2. RAVIKANT
S/O. HARISCHANDRA RATHOD
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER
R/O ARJANAL, TQ: INDI
NOW TQ: CHADACHAN
DIST: VIJAYAPUR - 586 123 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA M PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED)
3
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14-A OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES
(PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.02.2021
PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.70/2021 BY THE II ADDL.
SESSIONS JUDGE AT VIJAYAPUR AND ETC.
THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS COMING ON FOR
FURTHER HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING :
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri Shivanand V. Pattanashetti, learned
counsel for the appellantS and Sri Sharanabasappa M.
Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent No.1-State.
2. These two appeals are filed under Section 14-A
of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the
SC/ST (POA) Act' for short) seeking grant of bail.
3. Brief facts of case are as under:
A complaint came to be filed by one Ravikant
Harischandra Rathod contending that since 2-3 years, the
wife of the deceased by name Vimalabai W/o. Vithan
Rathod was having illicit relationship with accused No.2-
Rukmanna. In this regard, the complainant and family
members and her husband told her not to do such illegal
acts but she never heeded their advice. The deceased
Vithal Rathod told his wife several times not to make such
illicit relation with accused No.2-Rukmanna. Having
enraged by the same, accused No.1-Vimalabai with intent
to commit murder of her husband, in between 26.07.2020
at about 9.00 p.m. to 27.07.2020 at about 7.45 a.m. in
the morning, with the help of other accused persons, has
committed murder of her husband. Based on which, the
Police registered a case in Crime No.55/2020 for the
offences punishable under Sections 302, 341, 504 and 109
read with Section 34 of IPC & Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST
(POA) New Act-2015.
4. The matter was investigated inter allia
arresting the appellants in these two appeals. Yet another
accused by name Vimala Bai was also arrested by the
jurisdictional police. The matter is now thoroughly
investigated and charge sheet is also filed and appellants
are in custody.
5. The efforts made by the appellants to seek
grant of bail before the District Court, got dismissed by
order dated 07.10.2020. Being aggrieved by the same, the
appellants have preferred the present appeals.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants
Sri Shivanand V. Pattanasheti vehemently contended that
the Co-ordinate bench of this Court has granted bail to
Smt. Vimala Bai and therefore, on the ground of parity,
these appellants are also entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader opposes the bail application stating that the role
assigned to the present appellants are all together
different from the role assigned to Smt. Vimala Bai, who
has been granted bail and therefore, sought for dismissal
of the appeals.
8. This Court perused the order passed by the
Co-ordinate bench of this Court in Criminal Petition
No.200294/2021 dated 24.02.2021, wherein the
co-accused Vimala Bai granted bail. So also, this Court
perused the materials on record. In respect of the alleged
illicit relationship between Rukmanna and Smt. Vimala Bai,
the life of the husband of Vimala bai is taken away
allegedly by Lalsab. When Vimala bai, who is the motive
for the incident has been granted bail by Co-ordinate
bench of this Court, this Court finds no reason to deny
similar relief to the present appellants herein. The
apprehensions of the prosecution can be met with by
imposing suitable and stringent conditions. Accordingly,
pass the following:
ORDER
The appeals are allowed, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The appellants are granted bail on executing a bond
in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each with two sureties for
the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional
Court.
2. The appellants shall not directly or indirectly tamper
the prosecution witnesses or hamper the
investigation process.
3. The appellants shall attend the Court regularly
without fail.
4. The appellants shall not leave the jurisdiction of
Vijayapur District without prior permission of the trial
Judge.
It is made clear that any violation of the above
conditions would entitle the prosecution to seek for
cancellation of bail.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KA*
