Karnataka High Court
Suresh @ Suri @ Dicchi Suri vs State Of Karnataka on 16 February, 2023
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 146 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SURESH @ SURI @ DICCHI SURI
S/O SRINIVAS
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/AT K R LAYOUT
MADHUGIRI TOWN
MADHUGIRI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISRICT -572 132.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MAHESH S N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MADHUGIRI POLICE STATION
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
Digitally signed REPTD BY GOVT PLEADER
by SANDHYA S HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
Location: HIGH BANGALORE CITY -560 091
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 2. MARAKKA
W/O VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
RESIDING AT KARADIPURA VILLAGE
MADHGIURI TOWN
MADHUGIRI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT -572 132.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S VISWA MUTHRY, HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
-2-
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN
CRL.MISC.NO.1693/2022 DATED 02.12.2022 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
TUMAKURU AND PLEASED TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL WHICH
IS PENDING IN SPL.C.NO.136/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
302 AND 201 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3(2)(va) OF SC/ST
(POA) ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, TUMAKURU.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the
consent of both learned counsel, it is taken up for final
disposal.
2. This appeal is filed by accused No.7 challenging
the order dated 02.12.2022 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.1693/2022 by the III Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Tumakuru in respect of crime No.3/2022
of Madhugiri P.S. for the offence punishable under
Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and
under Section 3(2)(v)(a) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989.
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
3. Heard the learned counsel for appellant and
learned HCGP for respondent No.1-State.
4. Inspite of service of notice to respondent No.2
remained absent and unrepresented.
5. The case of the prosecution is that accused
No.2 was in love with Ms. X and the deceased Ravi had
eloped with Ms.X who was a minor and a case came to be
registered against him and he was released on bail and
therefore, accused No. 2 was having grudge against the
deceased Ravi. Accused No. 1 was also having previous
enimity with the deceased Ravi. As the deceased Ravi,
after his release on bail, had put the photo of one Maruti
@ Polard by writing `My Boss', accused Nos. 1 to 7 along
with juvenile offender conspired and on 11.01.2022
assaulted him with hands. Accused No. 1 assaulted with
fist on the face of the deceased. They changed his clothes
and took him to hospital where he was reported brought
dead. A charge sheet came to be filed against the
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
appellant and other accused for the offence punishable
under Sections 201 and 302 of IPC and Section 3(2)(Va)
of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
6. Appellant/accused No.7 came to be arrested on
22.09.2022 and he is in judicial custody.
Appellant/accused No.5 filed Crl.Misc.No.1693/2022
seeking bail and the same came to be rejected by
impugned order dated 02.12.2022 and the said order is
challenged in the instant appeal.
7. Learned counsel for appellant would contend
that no serious overtacts are alleged against the
appellant/accused No.7 and serious overt acts are alleged
against accused No.1 who is stated to have assaulted the
deceased with fist on his neck and head. It is his further
submission that accused Nos.5 and 6 who are similarly
placed as that of appellant/accused No.7 have been
granted bail by this Court in Crl.A.No.2035/2022 and
Crl.A.No.1387/2022. Therefore, he seeks grant of bail on
the ground of parity.
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
8. It is his further submission that the statement
of alleged eye witnesses CWs. 7 to 9 have been recorded
on 22.03.2022 and it is after arrest of the appellant and
other accused. Without considering all these aspects
learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order
which requires interference by this Court.
9. Per contra, learned HCGP for respondent No.1-
State would contend that CWs.7 to 9 are eye witnesses to
the incident and they have specifically stated the name of
this appellant/accused No.7 and other accused assaulting
the deceased Ravi with hands and taking him in a
Autorickshaw. The said statements of CWs.7 to 9 clearly
shows the participation of this appellant/accused No.7 in
the commission of murder of the deceased - Ravi. There
is also an allegation that this appellant/accused No.7 and
other accused took the injured Ravi by changing his
clothes to the hospital stating that he has sustained
injuries in an accident and tried to disappear the evidence.
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
Considering all these aspects learned Sessions Judge has
passed the impugned order which does not call for
interference by this Court. With this, he prayed for
dismissal of the appeal.
10. Having regard to the submissions made by
learned counsel for appellant and learned HCGP for
respondent No.1-State this Court has gone through the
impugned order and the charge sheet records.
11. The accusations leveled against
appellant/accused No.7 is that he along with accused
Nos.1 to 6 and child offender assaulted the deceased with
hands. There is no serious overt acts are alleged against
this appellant/accused No.7. Serious overt acts are
alleged against accused No.1 who is stated to have
assaulted the deceased with club on his head and neck.
Accused Nos.5 and 6 who were similarly placed to that of
appellant/accused No.7 have been granted bail by this
Court in Crl.A.No.2035/2022 and Crl.A.No.1387/2022 and
therefore, this appellant/accused No.7 is entitled for bail
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
on the ground of parity. The apprehension of the
prosecution is that if appellant/accused No.7 is granted
bail, there is threat to the prosecution witnesses can be
met by imposing stringent conditions. Without considering
all these aspects, learned Sessions Judge has passed the
impugned order which requires interference by this Court.
12. In the facts and circumstances of the case and
submission of the learned counsel for the parties, there are
valid grounds for setting aside the impugned order and
granting bail to appellant/accused No.7 subject to terms
and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
Appeal is allowed.
The order dated 02.12.2022 passed by III
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, in
Crl.Misc.No.1693/2022 is set aside and
appellant/accused No.7 is granted bail in Crime
CRL.A No. 146 of 2023
No.03/2022 of Madhugiri Police station subject to the
following conditions:
i. The appellant/accused No. 7 shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh
(Rupees One lakh only) with a surety for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Court.
ii. The appellant/accused No. 7 shall not indulge
in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii. The appellant/accused No. 7 shall attend the
Court on all the dates of hearing unless
exempted by the Court and cooperate for the
speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SSD
