Dodda Manjunatha vs The State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 7784 Kant

                                            -1-
                                                         NC: 2023:KHC:41295
                                                     CRL.A No. 1101 of 2023




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                    DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

                                         BEFORE
                    THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
                         CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1101 OF 2023
               BETWEEN:

               DODDA MANJUNATHA
               S/O GIRAGI VENKATAREDDY,
               AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
               R/A. ARURU VILLAGE,
               CHIKKBALLAPURA TALUK-562101.
                                                                 ...APPELLANT
               (BY SRI. LOURDU MARIYAPPA A.,ADVOCATE)
               AND:

               1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                     REP BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
                     CHIKKABALLAPUR SUB DIVISION,
                     CHIKKABALLAPUR,
Digitally            GUDIBANDE POLICE STATION,
signed by            GUDIBANDE,
SUMITHRA
R                    AND ALSO STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Location:            HIGH COURT BUILDING,
High Court           BENGALURU-560001.
of Karnataka
               2.    SMT. MANJULAMMA,
                     W/O A. C. RAMANJINEYA,
                     AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
                     R/A AVALANAGENAHALLI VILLAGE,
                     CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK-562101.

                                                               ...RESPONDENTS
               (BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1;
                     SRI. S.R.SREEPRASAD FOR R2)
                              -2-
                                            NC: 2023:KHC:41295
                                       CRL.A No. 1101 of 2023




      THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
PRAYING TO 1.SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.01.2023
IN CRL.MISC.NO.920/2022 IN ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED FIRST
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHIKKABALLAPURA AT
ANNEXURE-G AND THEREBY KINDLY GRANT REGULAR BAIL FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 143,147,148,324,307,302,447,114,109,120B R/W
149 OF IPC A/W 3(1)(r)(s)(w),3(2)(v)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
2015 IN SPL.S.C.NO.46/2021 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED FIRST
ADDL.DISTRICT    AND   SESSIONS    JUDGE   AT   CHIKKABALLAPURA
WHERE IN CRIMINAL CASE FIR NO.43/2021 REGISTERED BY THE
GUDIBANDE P.S., GUDIBANDE AND BY IMPOSING ANY CONDITIONS
BY ACCEPTING SOLVENT SURETY.

      THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                         JUDGMENT

The appellant arraigned as accused No.2 in the charge

sheet filed by Gudibande Police Station in connection with

Crime No.43/2021 has preferred this appeal to set aside the

order dated 16.01.2023 passed by the Learned First Additional

District and Sessions Judge at Chikkaballapura in

Crl.Misc.No.920/2022 and consequently to enlarge him on bail.

NC: 2023:KHC:41295 CRL.A No. 1101 of 2023

2. The appellant had earlier preferred

Crl.A.No.1529/2021 before this Court, with connected appeals,

which was dismissed on 22.04.2022.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that

the evidence of the witnesses namely PWs. 3 to 5 has been

recorded by the Trial Court and none of the said witnesses have

spoken about any overt act against the appellant and

therefore, further detention of the appellant in custody is

nothing but a pre trial conviction. He further contends that

accused Nos. 8, 9 and 11 are already enlarged on bail by this

Court and therefore, even the appellant may be enlarged on

bail.

4. The learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for the State and the learned counsel appearing for

respondent No.2 / defacto complainant have vehemently

opposed the relief sought by the appellant. They have

contended that as per the complaint averments even this

appellant was armed with a chopper and he has assaulted the

deceased. It is further contended that the appellant was a

member of unlawful assembly and all the accused came to the

NC: 2023:KHC:41295 CRL.A No. 1101 of 2023

spot with a common object to take away the life of the

deceased. They contended that if the appellant is granted bail,

then he may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and he

may also flee from justice.

5. Charge sheet is filed against accused Nos. 1 to 11

for offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 447,

302, 307, 324, 114, 109 and 120B of IPC and Section 3(1)(r),

3(1)(s), 3(1)(w),3(2)(va), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (PA) Act, 2015.

6. This Court after considering the nature of the

offence committed and the facts and circumstances of the case,

has dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant / accused

No.2. It is not in dispute that the Trial is in progress and about

17 witnesses are already examined. The evidence of the

prosecution witnesses who are now examined cannot be

appreciated at this stage, since any observations made in the

order may prejudice the trial of the case.

7. In so far as grant of bail to accused Nos. 8, 9 and

11 are concerned, this Court while allowing their appeals, has

observed that they were not present at the spot when the

incident took place and allegations against them are that, they

NC: 2023:KHC:41295 CRL.A No. 1101 of 2023

are abettors. Hence, grant of bail to the said accused is not a

ground to enlarge the appellant on bail at this stage. However,

considering that the appellant is in judicial custody since

23.05.2021 the Trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial.

8. Liberty is reserved to the appellant to move the trial

Court for bail if the trial is not concluded within a period of four

months.

9. With the above observations, appeal is dismissed.

SD/-

JUDGE

LDC