In the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore Dated This the 23Rd Day of April 2014 Before the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Budihal. R.B Cr

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2014 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B CRIMINAL PETITION NO.22/2014 BETWEEN : Thippesha @ Thippeswamy, S/o. Malleshappa, Aged about 23 years, Coolie, R/at Kesavinahaklu, Aldur Hobli, Chickmagalur Taluk & District, PinCode-577 101. Permanent R/o. Hirehalli Village, Challakere Taluk and Hobli, Chitradurga District, Pin Code-577 501. .. PETITIONER (By Sri. Subhash, Adv.) AND : State by Aldur Police Station, Chikmagalur (District), Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, High Court Complex, Bangalore-560 001. .. RESPONDENT (By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) 2 This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.157/2013 of Aldur P.S., Chickmagalur, for the offences P/U/S 201, 302 of IPC. This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: ORDER This petition is filed by petitioner-accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC registered in respondent-police station Crime No.157/2013. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments has submitted that at the first instance case was registered in UDR No.22/13 wherein the present petitioner himself was the complainant and 3 thereafter, the father of the deceased made the complaint making allegations against the petitioner that it is the petitioner who is responsible for the death of his daughter. On the basis of that complaint, case was registered in crime No.157/2013 and the petitioner was arrested. He has submitted that no witnesses have stated that they have seen the present petitioner committing the murder of the deceased. He has also submitted that no doubt the material collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation goes to show that there was some suspicion to the petitioner that the deceased was having illicit connection with one Raghu. However, that by itself is not sufficient to hold that there is a prima facie material placed by the prosecution against the petitioner that he has committed the murder of the deceased. It is submitted that now the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed in the matter. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner may be admitted to bail. 4 4. As against this, learned Government Pleader during the course of his arguments has submitted that C.Ws.11 to 14 are the eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and looking to their statement, it clearly shows that since deceased was having illicit connection with one Raghu, petitioner has committed the murder of the deceased by strangulating her. He has also submitted that the investigation materials clearly shows that there is a prima facie case made out against the present petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail. 5. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition and other charge sheet materials placed on record. 6. As submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, at the first instance, case was registered in UDR No.22/2013 wherein the petitioner himself is the complainant and thereafter, the father of the deceased 5 made the complaint. I have perused the statement of witnesses more particularly the statements of C.Ws.11 to 14 who are said to be eyewitnesses according to the case of the prosecution. But looking to their statement it is seen that they are not the direct eyewitnesses to the alleged incident. They have stated in their statement that they came to know about those facts, which they have narrated in their statement. Therefore, it is only the suspicion that under the circumstances, petitioner might have committed the murder of the deceased. But suspicion cannot take the place of proof. The same has to be ascertained during the course of trial after recording the evidence. 7. In view of the materials placed on record, I am of the opinion that petitioner can be admitted to bail by imposing reasonable conditions. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed in the matter. It is the contention of the petitioner that since from the date of arrest, he is in custody and that he is 6 innocent and is not involved in the commission of the alleged offences. 8. Hence, petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC registered in respondent- police station Crime No.157/2013, subject to following conditions:- (i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and furnish one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of concerned Court. (ii) He shall not intimidate or tamper with prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly. (iii) He shall appear before the concerned Court regularly. Sd/- JUDGE bkp .

Load more