Karnataka High Court
Rahul S/O Chandru Alias Chandrashekhar ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 December, 2023
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14966
CRL.A No. 100502 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100502 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. RAHUL S/O CHANDRU @ CHANDRASHEKHAR GOKAK,
AGE. 26 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. 2ND CROSS, GANGADHAR NAGAR,
SETTLEMENT, HUBBALLI-580012.
2. SANDEEP @ SAGAR S/O SHIVAPUTRA LOKAPUR,
AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O. #362, 3RD CROSS,
KOTILINGESHWAR NAGAR,
GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580012.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.M. SHIRALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY GOKUL ROAD POLICE, HUBBALLI,
Digitally signed
by
VIJAYALAKSHMI
THROUGH ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI
M KANKUPPI
Date:
2023.12.21
16:21:08 +0530
NORTH SUB-DIVISION HUBBALLI,
R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH DHARWAD-580007.
2. RAMAPPA S/O NAGAPPA DANDOLI,
AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. ELECTRIC WORK,
R/O. GANGADHAR NAGAR, SETTLEMENT,
2ND CROSS, HUBBALLI-580012.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. GANAPATI M. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14966
CRL.A No. 100502 of 2023
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.14A(2) OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO RELEASE THE APPELLANTS/ ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 3 ON
BAIL IN SPECIAL SC/ST NO.34/2023 REGISTERED FOR THE
OFFENCES P/U/SEC.302 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND U/S.3(2)(v) OF
SC/ST (PREVENTION ATROCITY) ACT 1989, ARISING OUT OF GOKUL
ROAD P.S. CRIME NO.32/2023 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES
P/U/S.302 R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED II
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD AND
SPECIAL COURT OF TRIAL OF THE OFFENCES UNDER P.O.C.S.O. ACT
AND S.C AND S.T. (P.O.A) ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by appellants/accused Nos.1 and
3 praying to set aside the order dated 11.08.2023 passed
in Spl.SC.ST No.34/2023 by the learned II Additional
Sessions Judge, Dharwad and Special Court for Trial of the
Offences under the POCSO Act and SC & ST(P.O.A) Act,
whereunder the bail application of this appellants/accused
Nos.1 and 3 sought in respect of Crime No.32/2023 of
Gokul Road Police Station for the offences punishable
under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code,
came to be rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants/
accused Nos.1 and 3, learned High Court Government
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14966
Pleader for respondent No.1/State and learned counsel for
respondent No.2/Complainant. Respondent No.2/
complainant is present before the Court and he is also
heard.
3. The case of prosecution is that accused Nos.4
and 5 and the deceased were together and went to the
place where the other accused were present which was the
place of incident and there was a fight between accused
No.1 and the deceased. Accused No.1 and the deceased
are relatives. CW-18-Suresh stated to be the eye witness
to the incident. He has stated that two persons were
assaulting one person with beer bottle on his head and
caused injury and others had held his hands and dragged
him. The appellants came to be arrested during course of
investigation. After completing the investigation, filed the
charge sheet against appellants/accused Nos.1 and 3 and
others for the offences punishable under Section 302 r/w
Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the
Schedule Cast/Schedule Tribe (prevention of Atrocities)
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14966
Act, 1989. The appellants have filed bail application
Spl.SC/ST No. 34/2023 and same came to be rejected by
impugned order dated 11.08.2023. The said order is
challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants/accused
Nos.1 and 3 would contend that appellant/accused No.1
and deceased are co-brothers and prosecution has not
recorded statement of Smt. Yashomathi (wife of accused
No.1) who has intimated about the incident to wife of the
deceased as told by accused No.1. He further submitted
that the incident occurred in the night hours and even eye
witness has stated in his statement that he could not see
car number due to night hours. He further submits that
accused Nos.1 and 3 have no intention to commit the
murder of the deceased. Even the staff of the Hospital i.e.,
CW-24 has stated that the appellants have brought the
deceased and itself shows that there was no intention on
the part of the appellants to commit the alleged offence.
As charge sheet is filed appellants/accused Nos.1 and 3
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14966
are not required for custodial interrogation. With this, he
prayed to allow the appeal and grant bail to the
appellants/accused Nos.1 and 3.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader appearing for respondent No.1-State and learned
counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that CW.18 is
the eyewitness to the incident and he has seen two
persons assaulting the deceased on his head and taking
him in the car. On being shown the accused persons, he
has identified the appellants i.e., accused Nos.1 and 3 as
the persons who have assaulted the deceased with beer
bottle and stone on his head. They contended that the
bloodstained cloths of accused Nos.1 and 3 have been
seized under Mahazar which they were wearing the said
cloths at the time of arrest. The charge-sheet materials
shows prima-facie case against the appellants for the
offences alleged against them. With this, they pray to
dismiss the appeal.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14966
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties,
the Court has perused the impugned order and charge-
sheet records.
7. The alleged incident has taken place on
16.04.2023 at about 11:30 p.m. CW.18-Suresh is the
eyewitness to the incident. He has seen the accused
persons sitting in the ground consuming liquor. He advised
them not to sit there and not to make galataa and
thereafter, he came and sat near the said ground. He
further stated that at about 11:30 p.m, he heard the
sound of quarrel and four persons assaulting to one person
and among them, one person took beer bottle and
assaulted on the head of another and another person
assaulted him with stone on his head. He has identified
accused Nos.1 and 3 as the persons who assaulted with
beer bottle and stone on the head of the deceased. The
doctor who conducted P.M examination over the dead
body of the deceased has opined that death is due to
respiratory failure as a result of head injury sustained.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14966
8. Whether the appellants-accused had intention
to commit the murder or not, it cannot be considered at
this stage while considering the bail petition. On perusal of
the entire charge-sheet there is a prima-facie case against
the appellants for the offences alleged against them.
Learned Special Judge considering the said aspects has
rightly rejected the bail application of the appellants by the
impugned order. There are no grounds for setting-aside
the impugned order and grant bail.
9. Hence, the criminal appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DSP & AM
CT:BCK
