Karnataka High Court
Mr Ramesh D R vs State Of Karnataka on 4 July, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:25268
CRL.A No. 1225 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1225 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
MR RAMESH D R
S/O RAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
WARD No.5, YELAHANKA BEEDI
DEVANAHALLI TOWN
BANGALORE RURAL - 562 110.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI M S SHYAM SUNDAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SMT. VANDANA P L, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI BY CHANNARAYAPATNA PS
Location: HIGH REPRESENTED BY SPP
COURT OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. MR. PRAVEEN C N
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
S/O NAGARAJ
CHANNAHALLI VILLAGE
CHANNARAYAPATTANA HOBLI
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 135.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RANGASWAMY R, HCGP FOR R1
SRI SANTHOSH KUMAR M B, ADVOCATE FOR R2 - V.C.)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:25268
CRL.A No. 1225 of 2024
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
2015 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE
LD. II ADDITIONAL DILSTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, AT BANGALORE IN
CRL.MISC.No.1330/2024 DATED 20.06.2024 VIDE ANNEUXRE-
A ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.0014/2024 DATED 31.01.2024 OF
CHANNARAYAPATNA P.S., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147,
148, 447, 323, 324, 307, 354, 504, 506, 120B R/W 149 OF IPC
AND SECTION 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(5)(f) SC/ST ACT, ARRAIGNING
THE PRESENT APPELLANT AS ACCUSED No.13 IN THE CHARGE
SHEET VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND GRANT REGULAR BAIL AND
ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by accused No.13 praying to
set-aside the order dated 26.06.2024 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.1330/2024 by the II Additional District and
Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru Rural
District, Bengaluru, whereunder, the bail application of this
appellant - accused No.13 sought in respect of Crime
No.14/2024 of Channarayapatna Police Station, registered
for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 120B,
323, 324, 302, 307, 354, 504 and 506 r/w Section 149 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w) and
3(2)(v-f) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
NC: 2024:KHC:25268
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, came to be
rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant - accused
No.13, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned
High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 -
State.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that CW8 -
Sri.Narayana Swamy is the owner of Sy.No.77 and he
agreed to sell 10 guntas of land out of 1 acre 10 guntas of
land to accused No.11 for a sum of Rs.12,85,000/- and
received an advance amount of Rs.3,15,000/-. Thereafter,
a substantial portion of the land in Sy.No.77 is acquired
for formation of road and CW8 has not executed a
registered sale deed and agreed to return the advance
amount to accused No.11. That, on 31.01.2024 at
9.30 am, CW8 was digging the bore well in his land.
Accused Nos.1 and 11 came there and raised objection for
such digging of bore well in the said land and CW8 did not
stop digging of the bore well. Accused Nos.1, 11 to 13
NC: 2024:KHC:25268
called accused Nos.2 to 10 near Toll Plaza and hatched
criminal conspiracy and accused Nos.1, 11 to 13 abetted
the other accused to make galata to stop the bore well
work and to commit the offences against CW8 and his
family members. Thereafter, accused Nos.1 to 10 formed
an unlawful assembly, accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 were
holding deadly weapons like clubs and accused No.8 was
holding chopper and they went to the land of CW8 at
10.30 am on 31.01.2024. Accused Nos.1 to 10 trespassed
into Sy.No.77 to stop digging the borewell. At that time,
CWs.1 to 9 and the deceased Sri.Sanjay raised objection
and accused Nos.1 to 10 assaulted them and as a result,
the deceased Sri.Sanjay sustained grievous bleeding
injuries and succumbed to the injuries on 09.02.2024 in
the hospital. CWs.1 and 5 sustained simple injuries and
CWs.2, 4, 6 and 7 sustained grievous injuries. CW3
sustained simple as well as grievous injuries. A complaint
came to be filed in that regard. After investigation, charge
sheet came to be filed for the aforesaid offences. This
appellant - accused No.13 came to be arrested on
NC: 2024:KHC:25268
01.02.2024 and he is in judicial custody. The appellant -
accused No.13 filed Crl.Misc.No.1330/2024 seeking bail
and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order
which is challenged in this appeal.
4. Learned senior counsel for the appellant - accused
No.13 would contend that on reading Column No.17 of the
Charge sheet, except conspiracy, there is no overt act
alleged against this appellant - accused No.13 assaulting
CWs.1 to 9 and the deceased. He submits that accused
No.11 has already been granted bail by this Court in
Crl.A.No.629/2024 and this appellant - accused No.13 is
also similarly placed to that of accused No.11 and
therefore, the appellant - accused No.13 is entitled for
grant of bail on the ground of parity. With this, he prayed
to allow the appeal and grant bail to the appellant -
accused No.13.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader
for respondent No.1 - State would contend that this
appellant - accused No.13 is brother of accused No.1. As
NC: 2024:KHC:25268
per the statement of the witnesses, this appellant -
accused No.13 was also present at the spot on the date of
incident. Section 149 of IPC, has been invoked against this
appellant - accused No.13. There are six injured and one
died in the incident. The charge sheet shows prima facie
case against this appellant - accused No.13. With this,
prayed to dismiss the appeal.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend
that name of this appellant - accused No.13 has been
stated in the complaint, being present at the spot, at the
time of the incident. If the appellant - accused No.13 is
granted bail, there is threat to the prosecution witnesses.
With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
7. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has
perused the impugned order and the material placed on
record.
8. On perusal of Column No.17 of the charge sheet,
there is no overt act alleged against this appellant -
NC: 2024:KHC:25268
accused No.13 of assault to CWs.1 to 9 and the deceased.
The only accusation against this appellant - accused No.13
is conspiracy with the other accused to kill the deceased.
Even for the sake of the argument, the contention of the
respondent is accepted that this appellant - accused No.13
is present at the spot, but no overt act of assault has been
alleged against him. As the charge sheet is filed, the
appellant - accused No.13 is not required for the custodial
interrogation. Without considering all these aspects, the
impugned order came to be passed which requires
interference by this Court. The appellant - accused No.13
has made out grounds for setting aside the impugned
order and for grant of bail. In the result, the following;
ORDER
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
26.06.2024 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1330/2024 by the
II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural
District, Bengaluru is set aside. The appellant - accused
No.13 is granted bail in Crime No.14/2024 of
NC: 2024:KHC:25268
Channarayapatna Police Station, subject to the following
conditions:
(i) The appellant - accused No.13 shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional
Court.
(ii) The appellant - accused No.13 shall not tamper
the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The appellant - accused No.13 shall attend the
Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted
and cooperate in speedy disposal of the case.
(iv) The appellant - accused No.13 shall not involve
in commission of any of the similar offence, till
the disposal of the case registered against him.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GH
