Criminal Petition No. 13136 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7583 CRL.P No. 13136 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13136 OF 2024 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. RAMESHA B.R., S/O RUDRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT ARANAKERE, BIDRE VILLAGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 146. (BY SRI. P.P. HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. AKSHAY KUMAR JAIN, ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONER
Legal Reasoning
Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH BALEHONNUR PS, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENT
Legal Reasoning
(BY MS. ASMA KOUSER, ADDL.SPP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN CONNECTION WITH S.C.NO.70/2024 (ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.19/2023 OF BALEHONNUR POLICE STATION) PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7583 CRL.P No. 13136 of 2024 CHIKKAMAGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 302 OF IPC, 1860 AND SEC. 3, 25 OF INDIAN ARMS ACT, 1959. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER FIR in crime No.19/2023 has been registered at Balehonnur Police Station, Chikkamagaluru against the petitioner, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and Section 3, 25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. 2. This petition is preferred praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 3. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioner, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the material on record. 4. Petitioner is accused of committing the murder of two persons by firing at them with a SBML gun. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7583 CRL.P No. 13136 of 2024 5. It is the case of prosecution that, on 20.02.2023 at about 10.30 a.m., the complainant- Prashanth, his brother Prakash and his cousin Praveen were going on a bike to Balehonnur. When they reached Aranakere, Bidar village, accused who was talking to one Mamatha, suddenly fired at them with a SBML gun, as a result, Prakash and Praveen sustained firearm injuries. The villagers namely Kallesh, Pradeep, Suresh, Shivanand, Laxmi, Ramesh, Yashawanth and Ruddrayya, who rushed to the spot, shifted both the victims to Ballehonnur Government Hospital, however, they succumbed to the injuries on the way to the hospital. 6. It is contended by the learned Senior Counsel that there is absolutely no motive for the accused to commit the offence. Accused has been suffering from mental disorder and he was of unsound mind, as it is evident from the past history and the treatment taken by him at one Manasa Hospital, Shivamogga. He contended that the accused was having abnormal behaviour and the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7583 CRL.P No. 13136 of 2024 medical report shows that he was having sleep disturbance, anger and anxiousness and he would eat insects crawling on the ground etc. He has therefore contended that in this case, Section 84 of IPC is attracted wherein, nothing is an offence which is done by a person by reason of unsoundness of mind. He has therefore, contended that even accepting the case of prosecution that, the accused has committed the offence, in view of the past history of his mental disorder and abnormal behaviour, he is entitled for the relief of bail. 7. Per contra, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor has contended that the complainant has clearly stated about the motive for the accused to commit the offence. Apart from the complainant, CWs.20 and 21 are the eye witnesses. Their statements have been recorded by the learned magistrate. Unlicensed SBML gun has been recovered at the instance of the accused. Hence, she contended that there is a prima facie case against the petitioner. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7583 CRL.P No. 13136 of 2024 8. Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor has further contended that the past history of the accused does not show that he was of unsound mind. She contended, if the petitioner is let on bail, there is every possibility of tampering the prosecution witnesses and also committing similar offence. She has therefore, sought to dismiss the petition. 9. Complainant is an eyewitness to the incident. Apart from him, there are two more eye witnesses namely CWs.20 and 21. Perused their statements, which clearly reveal that the accused has fired at the deceased with a SBML gun. As per PM report, cause of death is on account of firearm injuries sustained by the deceased. An unlicensed SBML gun has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner. Hence, there is a prima facie case against the petitioner. 10. The contention raised by the learned Senior Counsel that there was no motive for the accused to commit the offence, cannot be accepted. According to the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7583 CRL.P No. 13136 of 2024 prosecution, when the wife of the accused had been to her parental home, the victims had enquired about her whereabouts with the accused. Accused was under the impression that they were teasing, raking up the issue of his wife. Hence, he was nurturing illwill. 11. It is contended that the accused is suffering from mental disorder and he is having abnormal behaviour for which he has taken treatment at one Manasa Hospital, Shivamogga. However, there is no material placed on record to show that the accused was unsound mind as on the date of incident and he was incapable of knowing the nature of the act. As per complaint averments, at the time of incident the accused was talking to one mamatha and at that time he was holding a SBML gun. On seeing the deceased and the complainant, he suddenly fired at them, which shows that on account of the hostility, he shot at them and due to which, two sustained firearm injuries and died while being taken to the hospital. As rightly contended by the learned Additional Special Public - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:7583 CRL.P No. 13136 of 2024 Prosecutor, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there are chances of threatening the prosecution witnesses and also committing similar offence. 12. Therefore, petition is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE AMM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17 CT:SNN