Chandrappa S/O. Ningappa Mirji vs The State Of Karnataka
2024 Latest Caselaw 10471 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Chandrappa S/O. Ningappa Mirji vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 April, 2024

Author: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar

Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar

                                                -1-
                                                       NC: 2024:KHC-D:6446
                                                       CRL.A No. 100126 of 2024




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
                             DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
                                              BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
                    CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100126 OF 2024 (U/S 14 A(2) OF SC
                                        AND ST ACT)

                   BETWEEN:

                   CHANDRAPPA S/O. NINGAPPA MIRJI,
                   AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
                   R/AT: NEERALGI (N.M. TADAS),
                   TQ: SHIGGAON, DIST: HAVERI - 586118.
                                                                    ...APPELLANT.
                   (BY SRI GOURISHANKAR H MOT, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                        TADAS POLICE STATION, HAVERI,
                        R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                        HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                        DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.

                   2.   PARVATHGOWDA W/O. FAKKIRAGOWDA PATIL,
                        AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: FARMER,
                        R/AT: ADVISOMAPUR,
Digitally signed        TQ: SHIGGAON, DIST: HAVERI - 586193
by SUJATA                                                         ...RESPONDENTS
SUBHASH            (BY SRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
PAMMAR
                   SMT. ARADHANA V. MANVI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA               THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF
                   SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 2015, SEEKING TO
                   ALLOW THE APPEAL AND TO ENLARGE THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED
                   NO.2 ON REGULAR BAIL AS ATTACHED IN TADAS POLICE STATION
                   CRIME NO.82/2022 PENDING ON THE FILES OF 1ST ADDL.DISTRICT
                   AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, AT HAVERI IN
                   SPL.SC/ST NO.03/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
                   SECTIONS 201, 302, 120(B) OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(V), 3(2)(VA)
                   OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 2015, AND ETC.,.

                        THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT
                   DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                              -2-
                                   NC: 2024:KHC-D:6446
                                   CRL.A No. 100126 of 2024




                        JUDGMENT

The present appeal is filed under section 14A(2) of

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 2015, ('the Act' for short) praying to

enlarge the appellant/accused No.2 on bail in Tadas Police

Station Crime No.82/2022, pending on the file of I Addl.

District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Haveri, in

Spl. SC/ST No.03/2023, registered for the offences

punishable under sections 201, 302, 120(B) of the Indian

Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of the Act.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on

25.8.2022 at 1.30 p.m. when complainant was proceeding

towards Shiggaon for his personal work, near the land of

Abdulsab Hazaresab, people were gathered and came to

know that near the water channel flowing from Shyadambi

lake to Honnapure lake, a dead body of a man is placed on

a tyre and set on fire. The complainant went towards the

spot and saw that some unknown persons in between

24.8.2022 to 25.8.2022 at 1.30 p.m. murdered the above

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6446

mentioned male aged about 35 to 40 years with common

intention and then brought dead body to Advisomapure

and thrown near water channel flowing from Shyadambi

lake to Honnapur lake situated near the land of Abdulsab

Tadas and set fire to a tyre on a water canal and

destroyed evidence. Thus, based upon a complaint, case

came to be registered in Crime No.82/2022 for the

offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B) of

IPC read with section 3(2)(v) & 3(2)(va) of the Act.

3. The learned counsel for appellant/accused No.2

submitted that entire case is based on circumstantial

evidence. Therefore, when there is no eye witness and

there is no cogent evidence as per charge sheet material

against the appellant and therefore only on presumption,

the present appellant is arraigned as accused.

Furthermore, there is no overtact of murder against

accused No.2. Therefore, prayed for allowing the appeal

and enlarge the appellant on bail.

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6446

4. Notice issued to the complainant is served, but

he has not made any representation. Smt.Aradhana

Manvi, advocate, is appointed as the counsel appearing for

respondent No.2 and also to assist the Court.

5. Learned HCGP and learned counsel for

respondent No.2, who is victim have submitted that the

appellant/accused has hatched conspiracy for commission

of offence of murder of the deceased. It is submitted that

accused No.4 is wife of deceased and accused Nos.4 and 1

were having illicit relationship with each other. Therefore,

to eliminate the husband of accused No.4, all the accused

Nos.1 to 7 hatched conspiracy to murder the husband of

accused No.4. He further submits that if appellant/

accused No.2 is released on bail, there are chances of

tampering the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, prayed

for dismissal of the appeal.

6. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for

the appellant/accused No.2, learned HCGP for the

respondent State and learned counsel Smt.Aradhana

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6446

Manvi, appointed by this Court to represent respondent

No.2 and to assist the Court.

7. This is a successive appeal praying to release

accused No.2 on bail. This Court on 31.07.2023 has

dismissed the criminal appeal filed by accused No.2,

therefore, this second successive appeal is filed praying to

enlarge the appellant/accused No.2 on bail.

8. Upon considering the entire charge sheet

materials, the overt act alleged against appellant/accused

No.2 is that, he along with accused No.3 have brought the

deceased to the place of incident and accused No.1

assaulted the deceased with axe on the head and neck of

the deceased. This is the only overt act alleged against the

appellant/accused No.2. Therefore, accusation against the

appellant/accused No.2 is that he was having common

intention along with accused No.1. This is to be considered

during full fledged trial, whether this appellant has shared

common intention or not. In the charge sheet material,

there is no allegation that the appellant has shared

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6446

common intention attracting Section 34 of the Indian

Penal Code. Therefore, having shared common intention

by the appellant, is the question to be considered during

full fledged trial.

9. So far as accused Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7 are

concerned, bail is granted and they are enlarged on bail by

this Court by order dated 31.07.2023. The

appellant/accused No.2 is in judicial custody since

04.11.2022. Now the trial has begun, out of 52 witnesses,

20 witnesses have been examined. The entire case is

based on circumstantial evidence. The witnesses of last

seen theory who are CWs.35, 36 and 37, have been

examined as PWs.18, 19 and 20 respectively and they

have turned hostile. The mother and brother of deceased

have supported the case, but they are not the

eyewitnesses. Therefore, considering that appellant is in

judicial custody since 04.11.2022 and the overt act alleged

is against appellant that he has brought the deceased to

the place of incident and the allegation of having shared

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6446

common intention along with accused No.1, is the question

to be considered during full fledged trial. Therefore, on

these reasons, the Court deems it fit to enlarge the

appellant/accused No.2 on bail by allowing the appeal.

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

Appeal is allowed.

Appellant/accused No.2 is enlarged on bail in Spl.SC/ST No.3/2023 (Crime No.82/2022 of Tadas Police Station), pending on the file of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Haveri for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120-B of IPC and R/w Section 3(2) (va) & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (PA) Amendment Act, 2015, subject to the following:-

CONDITIONS

1. The appellant/accused No.2 shall execute personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-

(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two solvent sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court;

2. The appellant/accused No.2 shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6446

3. The appellant/accused No.2 shall attend the Court regularly on all the dates of hearing, without fail and shall co-operate for speedy disposal of the case.

4. If the appellant/accused No.2 fails to appear before the Court on two consecutive dates of hearing, then it may entail cancellation of liberty granted by this order.

Sd/-

JUDGE

MRK-para 1 to 5 KGK-para 6 to end.

CT:ANB