SHIVARAJ @ SHIVARAJ KUMAR v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SRINIVASPUR POLICE STATION, MULBAGAL SUB-DIVISION, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135, REPRESENTED BY HCGP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. SOWMYA D Location: High Court of Karnataka …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.305/2023 OF SRINIVASAPURA PS., KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.306 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR. - 2 - CRL.P No. 1335 of 2024 NC: 2024:KHC:13846 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for enlarging him on bail in Srinivasapura Police station, Crime No.305/2023, registered for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, which is pending on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC Court, Srinivasapura, Kolar District.

The complainant/Seenappa has lodged a complaint alleging that the accused/petitioner and the deceased belonged to Kolatur Village of Srinivasapura Taluk and the accused used to pressurize her to marry him or else he will not allow her to live and also instigated her to die. It is alleged that, on 11.09.2023 at about 5.00 p.m., the petitioner secured the deceased near water tank of Kolatur Village, wherein she alleged to have asserted that she will not be able to marry him, as he used to give trouble to her. However, the accused in the state of anger alleged to have said that, if she will not marry him, he will - 3 - CRL.P No. 1335 of 2024 NC: 2024:KHC:13846 not allow her to live and he will tarnish her reputation and also instigated her to die. Then the deceased said to have replied that, if she dies, the accused may live happily and as such, she jumped into a tank and she came in contact with electrical wire. CW.3 alleged to have seen this incident and attempted to save her, but she succumbed. Initially UDR No.28/22 came to be registered under Section 174(c) of Cr.P.C., but subsequently, on the basis of statement of witnesses the petitioner was implicated and a charge sheet was submitted against him for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, alleging that he has instigated the deceased in committing the suicide. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance and the matter is said to have been committed before the learned Sessions Judge and pending in SC No.192/2023. The petitioner has approached the learned Sessions Judge seeking regular bail, but the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the bail petition. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court. - 4 - CRL.P No. 1335 of 2024 NC: 2024:KHC:13846

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the records.

The allegations of the prosecution disclose that the death of the deceased is due to drowning. The post mortem report discloses that the death is due to "asphyxia" as a result of drowning. However, it is also noticed that electrical burn injuries on her head and her legs were noticed. At the same time, the records also disclose that the petitioner has also suffered burn injuries. The allegations of the prosecution disclose that when the deceased jumped into the water tank, at the instigation of the petitioner she came in contact with a live electrical wire which was hanging there and it can be attributed to the negligence of concerned authorities in not maintaining the electrical line and risking the lives of public as well as animals. But interestingly, the investigating officer did not bother to consider the negligence attributed to the Bescom authorities in this regard and he simply submitted a - 5 - CRL.P No. 1335 of 2024 NC: 2024:KHC:13846 charge sheet under Section 306 of IPC and this attitude of the investigating officer is highly objectionable.

Apart from that, the allegations against the petitioner are regarding instigation but what type of instigation is made by the petitioner is not at all forthcoming. In order to attract the offence under Section 306 of IPC, the ingredients under Section 107 of IPC, are required to be proved by the prosecution. But in the instant case, there is no such prima facie material evidence placed before this Court. The instigation should be of such a nature that the person committing suicide should not have any other option except committing suicide. But in the instant case, the allegations speak a different story regarding a love affair between the petitioner and the deceased and because they belonged to a different caste, the proposal of the marriage was not accepted due to which they decided to commit suicide. All facts and circumstances establish investigating officer has not applied his mind while - 6 - CRL.P No. 1335 of 2024 NC: 2024:KHC:13846 investigating the matter. The petitioner is in custody and his presence is no more required by the investigating agency. Further, the offence is said to have committed on