Karnataka High Court
Rajarajan @ Setu vs State Of Karnataka By on 20 February, 2025
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:7823
CRL.A No. 124 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 124 OF 2025 (U/S 14(A) (2)-)
BETWEEN:
RAJARAJAN @ SETU
S/O SELVARAJ
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT NO-9/14, 12TH CROSS,
K.P.AGRAHARA, MAGADI ROAD
BENGALURU - 562 123.
NATIVE AT
VALAJA VILLAGE,
AND LIMITS OF POLICE STATION,
NEAR V.C. MOTOR,
VELLUR DISTRICT,
TAMILNADU - 638 182.
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed by
VEDAVATHI A K
(BY SRI. BASAVARAJU T A., ADVOCATE)
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
MADANAYAKANAHALLY POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OFFICE
HIGH COURT BUILDING
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
AT BANGALURU - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:7823
CRL.A No. 124 of 2025
2. SMT. KASTURI
W/O LATE EKAMBARAM,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
R/AT NO-27, KARTHIK NAGAR,
HARIYURU, VELLUR NORTH,
ARKAD DISTRICT,
TAMILNADU - 632 503.
PERMANENT AT
NO-22/6, 6TH CROSS,
MAGADI ROAD,
NEAR KRISHNA BAR,
NAGAMMA NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 023.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:31.08.2024 PASSED IN
SPL.C.NO.506/2023 (CR.NO.540/2022) OF
MADANAYAKANAHALLY P.S., FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 302 R/W
34 OF IPC, U/S 3(2)(V) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, PENDING ON THE
FILE OF HON'BLE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
BENGALURU, CONSEQUENTLY ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON
INTERIM BAIL FOR A PERIOD OF 06 MONTHS.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:7823
CRL.A No. 124 of 2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by appellant/accused No.1 under
Section U/S 14(A)(2) of SC/ST (POA) Act for setting aside the
order passed by the Trial Court in SPL.C.No.506/2023 (Crime
No.540/2022) of Madanayakanahally Police station for the
offence punishable under Sections 302 read with 34 of IPC and
under Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST (POA) Act, pending on the file
of II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge,
Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned HCGP
for the State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the
appellant/accused No.1 was arrested by the police on the
accusation of commission of murder of one Nataraj and he was
arrested on 25.11.2022 and he was remanded to the judicial
custody. His bail petition previously was rejected by this court.
Once again he has approached the Sessions Judge for granting
interim bail for medical grounds which came to be rejected.
Hence, once again he is before this court.
NC: 2025:KHC:7823
4. Learned counsel for the accused submits that more
than 2 years he is in custody, the trial not yet begun and the
charges were not framed. Due to the gun shot, he lost his leg
due to gangrene and amputation was done above the knee. He
requires further treatment in higher hospital. Therefore,
prayed for granting the bail on medical grounds.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP filed objections contending
that he is rowdy sheeter, if he is released on bail he may
abscond and commit similar offence and threaten the
complainant and family members. He is having 8 cases
registered against him, he is a rowdy sheeter. Therefore,
prayed for rejecting the bail petition.
6. Even respondent No.2 complainant/the wife of the
deceased appeared before the court and requested not to grant
bail as he already left Bangalore and was staying at parents
house, after the commission of the murder.
7. Having heard the arguments and perused the
records, admittedly this court already rejected the bail
application on merits and trial is not yet begun, as per the
order sheet and it is posted for hearing on charges and due to
NC: 2025:KHC:7823
non production of accused to the Trial Court, the Trial not yet
commenced. He is in custody for more 2 years. However, the
medical records produced by the appellant reveals his left leg
amputated above his knee, the photographs also produced and
the doctors also given certificate that still the gangrene is
continuing and therefore he may require for further treatment
in higher hospital.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
though this court had rejected the bail application of the
accused on merits and the accused is not entitled for bail on
merits, but the medical record reveals he is required for further
treatment in the higher hospital, outside the government
hospital in a specialty hospitals. Therefore, without expressing
any opinion on the merits of the case, this court feels, if interim
bail shall be granted for 6 months for further treatment no
prejudice would cause to the prosecution case. The Trial Court
ought to have considered the bail application sympathetically
on the medical grounds, irrespective of the merits of the case.
Ofcourse he is rowdy sheeter having 8 cases and in 6 cases
ended in acquittal. The police were able to chase him only due
to gun shot otherwise he could have escaped from the police.
NC: 2025:KHC:7823
Keeping aside the merits of the case, by imposing certain
conditions, if interim bail is granted for limited tenure for the
purpose of treatment, the same may not cause prejudice to the
prosecution. Hence, the order of the Trial Court requires to be
set aside.
Accordingly, the order of the Trial Court is set aside.
This Criminal appeal is partly allowed. The appellant is
released on bail for six months.
The appellant/accused No.1 is ordered to be released on
bail by the Trial Court in SPL.C.No.506/2023 (Crime
No.540/2022) of Madanayakanahally Police station, pending on
the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special
Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, subject to the
following conditions:
(i) Appellant-accused No.1 shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties
for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial
Court;
(ii) Appellant shall not indulge in similar
offences strictly,
NC: 2025:KHC:7823
(iii) Appellant shall not tamper with the
prosecution witnesses directly/ indirectly,
(iv) Appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction
without prior permission of the trial Court,
(v) Appellant shall take the trial without causing
any delay and
(vi) Appellant not leave the jurisdiction of
Bangalore except for any further treatment
with prior permission of the Trial Court.
If any of the conditions are violated, the prosecution is at
liberty to cancel the bail.
After 6 months the appellant is directed to surrender
before the Trial Court
Sd/-
(K.NATARAJAN)
JUDGE
AKV
CT:SK
