Karnataka High Court
Sri. Arun vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
CRL.A No. 347 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 272 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.347 OF 2024
C/W
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.272 OF 2024
IN CRL.A.NO.347/2024
BETWEEN:
MR. DINESH KUMAR
S/O. DAYALAN
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
R/AT NO. 963, RED BUILDING
BACK SITE, 7TH CROSS, PIPE LINE
KGF TOWN-563 113.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI HASHMATH PASHA, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI MOHAMMED MUBARAK, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AND:
MOUNESHWARAPPA
NAGARATHNA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
KARNATAKA
CHINTAMANI TOWN POLICE STATION
CHINTAMANI-563 125
REPRESENTED BY
LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA-560 001.
2. MR. MURALI
S/O. TIPPANNA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
MUNICIPAL COUNSELLOR
R/AT AGRAHARA
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
CRL.A No. 347 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 272 of 2024
CHINTAMANI TOWN
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 125.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAJATH SUBRAMANYAM, H.C.G.P. FOR R-1;
SRI KALYAN R. FOR R-2)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2)
OF SC/ST POA ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
05.02.2024 PASSED IN SPL.S.C.NO.145/2023 WHICH IS PENDING
ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 307 R/W 34 OF IPC AND UNDER
SECTIONS 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT WHICH IS
ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.194/2023 OF CHINTHAMANI TOWN POLICE
STATION, CHINTAMANI AND CONSEQUENTIALLY RELEASE HIM ON
BAIL.
IN CRL.A.NO.272/2024
BETWEEN:
SRI ARUN
S/O. SANJAY
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/AT NO.1007, NEAR
GAGAMANA TEMPLE, 7TH CROSS
SUBHAS, K.G.F. TOWN
KOLAR-563 115.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI NANJUNDA GOWDA M. R., ADVOCATE
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY Dy.S.P. CHINTAMANI
SUB DIVISION, CHINTAMANI
CHIKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 001.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
CRL.A No. 347 of 2024
C/W CRL.A No. 272 of 2024
2. RAMESH P.S.I.
CHINTAMANI TOWN POLICE
CHINTAMANI.
3. SRI MURALI
S/O. THIPPANNA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
MUNICIPAL COUNSELLOR
R/AT AGRAHARA
CHINTAMANI TOWN
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 125.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAJATH SUBRAMANYAM, H.C.G.P. FOR R-1 AND R-2
SRI KALYAN FOR R-3)
* **
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2)
OF SC/ST POA ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED
ON 19.01.2024 IN SPL.S.C.NO.145/2023, ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
CHIKKABALLAPURA AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND RELEASE THE
APPELLANT ON REGULAR BAIL FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 3(1)(R), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
1989.
THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned Senior Counsel Sri. Hashmath Pasha, for the
appellant in Crl.A.No.347/2024 has filed a memo with copy
of the order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in W.P.No.6150/2024, wherein this
Court stayed the order dated 18.12.2023 passed by the
trial court in Spl.S.C.No.145/2023 insofar as offences
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
punishable under Sections 3(1) (r), 3(2) (v), 3(2) (va) of
the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribe(Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989, till next date of hearing. Memo is
placed on record.
2. Crl.A.No.347/2024 is filed by appellant/accused
No.2 under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [for
short, 'SC/ST (POA) Act'] praying to set aside the order
dated 05.02.2024 passed in Spl.S.C.No.145/2023 by the I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura,
for the offences punishable under Section 307 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (for short,
'IPC') and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of
the SC/ST (POA) Act which is arising out of Crime
No.194/2023 of Chintamani Town Police Station,
Chintamani and Crl.A.No.272/2024 is filed by
appellant/accused No.3 under Section 14A(2) of 'SC/ST
(POA) Act' praying to set aside the order dated 19.01.2024
passed in Spl.S.C.No.145/2023 by the I Additional District
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura, for the offences
punishable under Sections 120B, 114, 324, 326, 307, 201
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (for
short, 'IPC') and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v), 3(2) (va)
of the SC/ST (POA) Act, whereby the applications filed by
the appellants/accused Nos.2 and 3 seeking bail have
been rejected.
3. Heard Sri Hasmath Pasha, learned Senior Counsel
along with Sri. Mohammed Mubarak, learned counsel for
the appellant in Crl.A.No.347/2024 and Sri. Nanjunda
Gowda M.R., learned counsel for the appellant in
Crl.A.272/2024, Sri. Rajath Subramanyam, learned High
Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and
Sri Kalyan R., learned counsel for respondent No.2-
complainant in Crl.A.No.347/2024 and for respondent
No.3-complainant in Crl.A.No.272/2024 and perused the
material available on record.
4. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that,
on 14.10.2023 at 00:30 a.m., the Sub-Inspector of Police-
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
II of Chintamani Town Police Station, Chintamani, lodged a
complaint alleging that on 13.10.2023 at 6:15 p.m., while
he along with CHC-177 were on patrolling duty, they
received a call from an unknown person, wherein he
informed that near Veerabhadreshwara Bakery, Gajanana
Circle, M.G. Road, Chintamani, the victim Murali, Municipal
Councillor of Chintamani City, has been assaulted by some
unknown persons with weapons on his head, hands and
caused bleeding injuries and he was shifted to the
Government hospital, Chintamani, for treatment. Hence,
he and CHC-177 came to the hospital and saw the injured
Murali, a member of City Municipality, who was brought by
Thirumalappa. Thus, he enquired Thirumalappa and came
to know that about three to four persons attempted to
commit the murder of Murali. Hence, he lodged a suo
moto complaint, which led to registration of F.I.R. and
investigation.
5. During the course of investigation, the Sub-
Inspector of Police recorded the statement of the victim on
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
15.10.2023, wherein, the victim disclosed the names of
the accused persons. Hence, the Investigating Officer
arrested accused Nos.1 to 4 and in turn, they were
remanded to judicial custody. The appellants/accused
Nos.2 and 3 filed applications seeking bail before the trial
Court and the same were rejected on 05.02.2024 and
19.01.2024. Hence, the appellants are before this Court.
6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
appellant/accused No.2 and learned counsel for appearing
for the appellant/accused No.3 have contended that as per
the case of the prosecution, the victim was assaulted by
accused Nos.1 to 3 and accused No.4 abetted the
commission of offence. Now, the investigation is
completed and the Investigating Officer has filed the
charge-sheet to the Court. The learned counsels further
contended that C.W.Nos.4, 5 and 8 appears to be planted
eye witnesses. The Investigating Officer has not conducted
Test identification parade as required under Section 9 of
the Indian Evidence Act. The alleged offences are not
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is
submitted that the injured-victim has already been
discharged from the hospital. The appellants hail from
respectable families and they have permanent abodes in
the locality. They are ready to abide by the conditions to
be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed to allow the
appeals.
7. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for
respondent-State contended that the appellants are
involved in heinous offences punishable under Section 307
IPC and they have participated in the crime and assaulted
the victim with chopper and knife on the vital organs i.e.,
on head, hands, shoulder and knee of the victim. Accused
No.2 is involved in a criminal case and accused No.3 is
involved in two criminal cases. He further submitted that
as per the CDR report, the actual participation of accused
Nos.1 to 3 is clearly visible which is on the instigation of
accused No.4. If the appellants/accused are enlarged on
bail, there is likelihood of tampering the prosecution case
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
and hampering the trial. Hence, he prayed to reject the
bail application filed by the appellants/accused Nos.2 and
3.
8. Learned counsel appearing for respondent
complainant submitted that there is sufficient material to
show the involvement of the appellants in the case. There
are various criminal cases pending against the appellants
and accused Nos.1 to 3 have attacked on CW-2 Murali.
Hence, there is sufficient material against the appellants to
attract section 307 IPC.
9. Considering the rival contentions urged by learned
counsel for the parties, the following point arises for
consideration of this Court:-
are entitled for regular bail under section 439
Cr.P.C.?
10. From the perusal of the material available on
record, it appears that on account of previous enmity
between accused No.4 and the victim, on 13.10.2023 at
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
about 6.15 p.m., near Veerabhadreshwara Bakery,
accused Nos.1 to 3 alleged to have assaulted CW-2 victim
on his head, hands, knee and shoulder with knife and
chopper and thereby attempted to commit his murder.
From the perusal of the statement of CWs.4, 5 and 8, it
appears that on 25.10.2023, the Investigating Officer
recorded their statements, but the Investigating Officer
has not conducted the Test Identification Parade to
identify accused Nos.1 to 3 by the alleged eye witnesses
and injured person. More importantly, CW-2 injured has
been discharged from the hospital. Even the Investigating
Officer has not conducted Test identification parade
though accused Nos.1 to 3 were very much available in
the prison.
11. At this stage, the Court cannot conduct mini trial
and only prima-facie case has to be seen. Since the
investigation is completed and Investigating Officer has
filed the charge sheet and the victim is discharged from
the hospital, hence, accused Nos.2 and 3 are entitled for
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
bail, considering the nature of offences and circumstances
in which the offences is committed, likelihood of fleeing
away from justice, of repeating same offences by the
appellants, of tampering with the witnesses, character,
antecedents of the appellants are concerned. Further, the
law is well settled that while disposing off a bail petition,
the Court need not hold mini trial. Keeping all these
aspects, this Court has gone through the entire material
placed on record and it appears that, prima-facie, there
are no reasonable and sufficient grounds to believe, at this
stage, that the appellants are guilty of the offences
alleged. Hence, the Court proceeds to pass the following:-
ORDER
Criminal appeals are allowed.
The appellants/accused Nos.2 and 3 are ordered to
be released on bail in Crime No.194/2023 registered for
the offence punishable under Section 307 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, pending on the
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:15839
file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Chikkaballapura, subject to the following conditions:
i. The appellants/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall
execute a personal bond in a sum of
Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only) each
with two sureties for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the trial Court;
ii. The appellants/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall
not tamper with the prosecution witnesses
directly or indirectly;
iii. The appellants shall not commit similar
offences;
iv. The appellants shall appear before the trial
Court on all dates of hearing without fail,
and
v. The appellants shall not leave the jurisdiction
of the trial Court without its prior permission.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MN
