Sri Siddarath vs State By
2022 Latest Caselaw 828 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 828 Kant
Judgement Date : 18 January, 2022

Karnataka High Court

Sri Siddarath vs State By on 18 January, 2022

Bench: K.S.Mudagal

                                           CRL.A.No.1566/2021


                           1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF JANUARY 2022

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

          CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1566/2021

BETWEEN:

SRI.SIDDARATH
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
S/O SHEENA SUVARNA
R/O 'SRINIVASA' KADKE
BADANIDIYOOR VILLAGE
UDUPI TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 101               ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI.K.PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE BY BRAHMAVAR POLICE STATION
       UDUPI
       REPRESENTED BY
       STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
       HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     SMT.JYOTHI
       AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
       W/O LATE NAVEEN NAIK
       GUARDIAN OF VICTIM
       R/AT UDDALLA, HOSURU VILLAGE
       BRAHMAVAR TALUK - 576 213       ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHANKAR H.S., HCGP FOR R1;
    R2 IS SERVED)
                                                 CRL.A.No.1566/2021


                                2



      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
14A(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE
APPELLANT     ON      BAIL    IN SPL.CASE NO.28/2021
(CR.NO.22/2021) REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE,
THE SAME IS PENDING TRIAL ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS/SPECIAL JUDGE AT UDUPI FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 452,
323, 112, 120B, 302, 149 OF IPC.

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                           JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the rejection of his application for grant

of bail, accused No.5 in Special Case No.28/2021 on the

file of Principal District & Sessions/Special Judge, Udupi

has preferred the above appeal.

2. The appellant and six others are facing trial in

Spl. Case No.28/2021 before the trial Court for the

offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 452, 323,

112, 120B, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections

3(2)(V) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 ('the

SC/ST Act' for short).

CRL.A.No.1566/2021

3. The victim Naveen @ Gundu Naik belonged to

the scheduled tribe, CW.1 is his son aged 15 years. On

14.02.2021 at about 9.30 p.m. Naveen @ Gundu Naik was

murdered in his house situated in Karje village, Brahmavar

Taluk. The appellant is the brother of Goutham.

4. The case of the prosecution in brief is as

follows:

That Naveen @ Gundu Naik was the elder person in

the village. Accused No.7 was his neighbour. Accused

Nos.1 and 7 were having objectionable relationship.

Naveen @ Gundu Naik had advised accused Nos.1 and 7 in

that regard. Being enraged by that, the accused conspired

to commit his murder. In execution of such conspiracy, on

14.02.2021 at 9 p.m., taking opportunity of Naveen @

Gundu Naik being alone at home, the accused trespassed

in to his house. Accused Nos.1 and 2 assaulted him with

club, accused No.3 slapped him on his cheeks,

accused Nos.4 to 6 beat him and stamped him on his

stomach. Accused Nos.1 and 2 assaulted on his face, chest CRL.A.No.1566/2021

and legs. Accused No.1 stamped on the neck of the injured

Naveen @ Gundu Naik and committed his murder.

5. The trial Court has granted bail to accused

No.6 on the medical ground. Accused No.7 was granted

bail on the ground that she has only instigated/abetted

accused No.1. The trial Court rejected the bail application

of the appellant on the ground that there are allegations of

assault by him.

6. The entire case is based on circumstantial

evidence. There are no eyewitnesses to the incident. The

main apprehension of the prosecution is that if the bail is

granted the appellant may threaten the widow and minor

children of the deceased.

7. Having regard to the nature of the allegations

against the appellant and when the case is based wholly on

the circumstantial evidence, detention of the appellant by

way of pre-trial conviction and sentence is not justifiable.

Therefore the appeal is allowed.

CRL.A.No.1566/2021

The impugned order dated 23.07.2021 passed in

Special Case No. 28/2021 is set aside.

The appellant's bail application is allowed. He is

granted bail in Crime No. 22/2021 of Brahmavar police

station which is now pending in Spl. Case No.28/2021 on

the file of the Principal District & Sessions/Special Judge,

Udupi subject to the following conditions:

(i) The appellant shall execute personal bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;