SATHISH v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SARJAPURA POLICE STATION ANEKAL TALUK, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001 (BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP) …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN C.C.NO.81/2024 (CR.NO.365/2023) OF SARJAPURA P.S., BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302, 120B, 201 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C AT ANEKAL. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA Location: high court of karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:35919 CRL.P No. 5252 of 2024 ORAL ORDER The petitioner-accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.365/2023 of Sarjapura Police Station, pending C.C.No.81/2024, on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Anekal, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B, 201 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant - Kiran.

2. Heard Sri. Prasanna Kumar. P, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused the materials on record.

3. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: “Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?” My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following: - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:35919 CRL.P No. 5252 of 2024 R E A S O N S

4. Petitioner being accused No.2 is seeking grant of bail. He was apprehended on 31.10.2023 and since then he is in judicial custody. After seeing the dead body, the informant gave the information to the police. After registering the FIR, the investigation was undertaken. Accused Nos.1 to 4 were apprehended and after investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed.

5. It is the specific contention of the prosecution that accused No.3 had an affair with the deceased and they were in live-in relationship since about 9 months. Accused No.3 had developed intimacy with accused No.2 and the same was objected by the deceased. Therefore, accused Nos.2 and 3 were having motive to cause death of the deceased. They engaged the services of accused Nos.1 and 4 by promising to pay supari of Rs.2 to 3 lakhs. On the date of incident, they had a party and later accused No.1 assaulted the deceased on his head with a machete. Accused No.2 also assaulted him with the same machete as a result of which, he died. The dead body was thrown into the river. Accused No.4 received Rs.50,000/- - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:35919 CRL.P No. 5252 of 2024 from accused No.2, out of which, an amount of Rs.20,000/- was transferred to the account of accused No.1.

6. As per the case made out by the prosecution, the petitioner was having strong motive to cause the death of the deceased. Admittedly, there are no eye-witnesses to the incident. The only circumstantial evidence relied on by the prosecution against the present petitioner is recovery of the Fortune car belonging to one Anil Kumar, who is not an accused in the present case. Apart from this, there are no other incriminating materials. It is stated that even though the prosecution is placing reliance on the CCTV footage to contend that accused Nos. 1 to 4 have taken the deceased to the Bar and have consumed alcohol, the footage said to have referred to only accused Nos. 1 to 4 and not to the deceased. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail. Admittedly, accused No.3 against whom similar allegations are made is already enlarged on bail. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:35919 CRL.P No. 5252 of 2024

7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.365/2023 of Sarjapura Police Station, pending in pending in C.C.No.81/2024 on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Anekal, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions: a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences. b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required. If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail. On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:35919 CRL.P No. 5252 of 2024 report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE SPV List No.: 3 Sl No.: 5