SRI. SRIKANTA GOUDA 5/0 SHANKARA GOUDA GUREDDI v. ThE STATE BY TALIKOTI POLICE

ORDER Petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 169/2011 of Talikoti Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 341, 324, 354, 307, 504, 506(2) nw Section 149 of IPC are seeking for being enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest.

2. Case of the prosecution in brief is: Complaint came to be lodged by one Smt. Neelamma stating that there was a civil dispute between her aunt Sharadamma, wife of Doddappa gouda and Shanthana Gouda Shankar Gouda Gureddi in respect of 3 a landed property and the said Shanthana Gouda was forcing the complaint to give evidence in the Civil suit in their favour. It was stated that on 12.09.2011 at about

7.30 p.m. when she was in front of her house accused No.1 dashed his motor cycle against brother of the complainant and she took objection to the said act of accused No.1 and thereafter petitioners along with other accused persons came in a unlawful assembly abused the complainant and assaulted her with sickle on her head and remaining accused dragged the complainant by holding her nighty and assaulted her with hands by pulling her down. They assaulted on her chest, stamped on her, kicked and attempted to commit her murder and in the scuffle she sustained injuries. Said complaint came to be registered on 14.09.2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 341, 324, 354, 307, 504, 506(2) and 149 of IPC. Thereafter on account of death of the complainant, Section 302 of IPC has added in the FIR with the leave of the Court. 4

3. Heard Sri. Veeresh B Patil, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Smt. Anuradha M Desai, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for State. Perused the records.

4. It the contention of learned counsel appearing for petitioners that allegation made in the complaint are vague and medical certificate issued by the Government Hospital would clearly disclose that injuries suffered by the complainant are simple in nature and deceased had been discharged on the same day. It is contended that complainant was suffering from severe aliments and she expired on account of renal failure and not on account of alleged injuries. He would also draw the attention of the Court to various medial records produced along with the petition to contend that complainant expired due to renal failure and ricketsial decease.

5. Per contra, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would oppose the grant of anticipatory bail 5 by contending that offence alleged against petitioners are heinous In nature and same Is punishable with life Imprisonment or death and If petitioners are enlarged on bail they are likely to abscond or obstruct the trial by terrorizing and Inducing the prosecution witnesses.

6. HavIng heard the learned counsel appearing for parties and on perusal of the voluminous records produced along with the petition as also records produced by Additional SPP it would emerge from reading of the complaint that deceased herself had lodged a complaint on 14.09.2011 allegIng that on account of there being civil dispute between two families to which she was supposed to tender evidence as witness and was being forced upon by Shanthana Gouda gouda to tender evidence on his behalf and on her refusal to do so, enmity had been developed. She also states In her complaint that on 12.09.2011 on account of her brother being hit by motorcycle by accused No.1 she questioned the accused persons and 4— 6 on account of the said questioning she was assaulted by accused No.1 with the assistance of accused No.2 and other accused persons. She also states that on the said date i.e., on 12.09.2011 she was assaulted by one Sri. Somanagouda Moolimani by sickle on her head and she received injury on her head resulting in blood oozing out. She has also stated that other accused persons pushed her down and kicked her. Reading of the complaint would go to show that the overt-act of assault is said to have been made by Somanagouda Moolimani accused No.3. Wound certificate issued on 22.09.2011 by the Medical Officer of Muddebihal would disclose that two injuries found on the deceased are both simple in nature. Deceased has been admitted to District Hospital, Bijapur on 13.09.2011 and discharged on

14.09.2011. X-ray taken by the Hospital reflects that there is no fracture of skull. Subsequently, she was admitted to B.L.D.E. Association Medical College Hospital and Research Center, Bijapur on 15.09.2011 and discharged on 17.09.2011 which was also against 7 the medical advice. Case sheet maintained at Hospital produced along with the petition would go to show that on 23.09.2011 she was admitted to Walness Hospital, Miraj and case sheet maintained at the said Hospital would reflect that deceased was suffering from ricketsial decease with acute renal failure (kidney failure) and was on constant medication and did not response to the treatment and expired on 29.09.2011. PM report would go to show that head injury sustained by the deceased is the same as found in the wound certificate dated 22.09.2011. Cause of death namely opinion has been given as under: “Evidence of pulmcrnary edema, preserved viscera was present for chemical analysis and histopathological analysis.”

7. Perusal of the entire medical records prima fade would go to show the cause of death is also on account of renal failure. As to cause of death is due to injury or renal failure has to be proved by prosecution 4-- 8 during trial. Prima facie post mortem report with regard to head injury does not speak about any fracture either to the skull or to the brain. Even in the complaint, deceased herself has stated that it is accused No.3 who has assaulted with sickle on the head. Thus overt-act of these petitioners if any is required to be proved by the prosecution during the course of the Trial. As such I do find any justifiable ground to deny the prayer sought for by the petitioners in the present petition.

8. Accordingly, following order is passed: ORDER

1. Petition is allowed.

2. In the event of petitioners being arrested in Crime No.169/2011 by Talikote Police Station, they are hereby directed to be released on bail, on their executing bond for a sum of 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each and two independent the likesum and sureties subject to following conditions: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) 9 Petitioners shall surrender before Talikote Police Station within three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Petitioners shall not tamper or terrorize or induce the prosecution witnesses. Petitioners appear before Investigating Officer whenever called upon for the purposes of investigation and co— operate with the Investigating Officer. Petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without express permission. Petitioners shall appear before Talikote Police Station on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. to mark their attendance till filing of chargesheet. (vi) If any conditions are violated prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. NB* Sd/ JUDGE