High Court Karnataka High Court

Gundappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Gundappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 November, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
IN THE HIGH mum' 01:' KARNA'rAKA-I 'f ~ 
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD4':      
DATED THIS THE 2541* DAY_0Fn;ova;'."N1';§E}§¢»%:é6a s_V¢.  V

BEFORE'

THE HON'BLE Mriazgsrxéia §;.w..N:;AT  

 

QIQMINALAPETETIGN 1.zs1ci;'7_4§%s',:;2;oo8

CRIMINAL 13ETrr1;§:N-.Nuj42Sz2§Q3_ 

BETWEEN:    

cRL.p.N0.?fi%.1?>f:1\'    

1.

co' 

    _--
s/e.shivappa :3   
Age:£31 

. Gulappav " 

 <5. Shivapfya. _ 

._A'gc:;S2 grgars, 

[ "Ra_vi,._ §§';f§u3.appa Dandin
-.1§.g¢:'30';Y¢&I $;"O<:c:S'tudcnt.

. 

S/’ Q-Mudakappa Dandin

jAge:2.6 years, Occzstudcnt.

.’ –h4 §lhaningappa @ Maning
‘E S/anshivappa Dandin,

All are R] o.Ka11ur village
Tq. av. Dismflhazwad.

(By Sn K.L.Pat11,, Adv.)

AND:

The State of Kaxnataka _ _

By Police Station ‘ _V
Rep. by tate Public Pxosccutofié, –.
Dhazwad. _ ” _ …f€c-spondent
(By Sri Anand _

This cr1mma’v ‘ 1 isé –[_= ugqder section 439
Cr.P.C. pray*in.g tg_> emerge’ thc:§n(:«..;1_a4:_titio1r;£;i:~$/accused No.1 to
5 on bail PC-S. iC’1’imc7′ NO;C36{2008 which is change

shected fqrofi’_ei3;:g}3 pamgihahie my 3,143, 147, 148, 302 r/w.
149 IPC ii”: N034/€28.03 the of the Fast Court No.1,

CRL.P.BiO,47498l’2»(-}§'{.’§3::.\’:

Vit17;.ai_ ‘k ‘

A Ag€::23″3%ea:”ml 0cc:Agn’cu1ture
‘ R’io,Ka_1lur ViHa_’gc
Tq. {)ist;'{)_h.3i§:sz;sa:£f;. …PetEt:ioner

(E’53r._:.’£*sriV_£~{~. Adv.)

AND: ” 1

Th,’t;§3tatc of Kammaka
“By Cg Police Station

Rep. by State Public Prosecutor

‘”Dhanvad. …Respondcnt

(By Sri Anand Kflavalgimath, HCGP)

V’ .__

This criminal petition is filed under .em1,:i'(‘>n_”–.439
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner} -‘.-_r,_;iie_
bail in Gadag P.S. Crime No.26/2008 wh;’reI1.ie. Charge *
sheeted for offences punishable u/5.143, 14-7*,v«1:4:8,”’30i3 I/_w.” u b
149 IPC in s.(:. No.54/08 on thevfilge orithc Fast r’ o1tiers_;”‘Vt’Ef;ie :(la$’f, the ‘ ;
Court made the following: ” . V _ ‘V ”

E

The petitieanezs Nos. 1 to 5 in
S.C.No.54[ punishable under

Sections 143,e7:%i:ze, 1%:¢3′,1V:§ti~2 149 me.

‘T116 the intervening night of

3/ to have committed murder of

It__…i.Sv alleged that there was ?/previous

‘ efiemi!y”be*&’een the family members of deceased and the

” .3. 711; is the ease of prosecution during the intervening

of 3/4.2.2008, the deceased was keeping Watch of

of bengal game in his land. At that time, petitzionem

and accused No.7’ armed with deadly weapons, assaulteti
y\; (3:

and lance the deceased. On the renewing day;
brother of deceased namely Channabasappa leeiifntj V’
occurrence and saw the dead bo¢eyo’¢frm;¢§s¢§:
complaint against petitionerg
their involvement. The the V
infoxmafion volunteered. by I, 6, stones

and iron rods were recovered; «}

4. I h;;.ve;, = appearing for
petitioners” and I have heen

taken

6. The petitioners would submit that

goetifionefs’-»a;fe’1invo1ved on suspicion. The statement of

. _ E:} 7e –~ Moulasab is highly inczedibie. He

witnessed the alleged occurrence under
A _em}_er of darmess. His statement does not disclose

the of light under which he was able to identiijz the

‘ x Though he is alleged to have witnessed the

occurrence, he had not informed the brother of the

deceased, soon after the occurrence. His name does not

N C £:}M__£,__,.§_i__\

find place in the F.i.R. His statement under “:51

Cr.P.C. was recorded on 55.2.2008.

The learned Counsei

of Mylara G-owda that he had s§e;;;%~z2ae acéixfiéfd «’= *’

weapons of assault were re’t:; m:”‘:’ng in’ is higbty

improbable.

The fingeppnntsgs aacusgg found in the
liquor bottlcf: gfiéiffitriéncc. Themforc, his
prescncc is confixmad.

tags material collected durm’ g
the gf not suficicnt to establish primal

They are the members of the same

ihégtfom, they are entitled to release on bail

6. ed Government Advocate would submit

tl;1at”s!:.ék1:t::;r:zvcnts of Mouiasab and Mylara Gowda would prima

V’ :~ * «establish involvement of petitioners. The weapons of

‘ were recovered on the infonnafion volunteered by

We ~l;vv’£i3″”L<««e:A].:….§

petitioners in Cr1.P.No.7425/ 2003 and the "in

CrI.P.No.'7498/ 2093.

7′. On careful consixzlerafioga

11/S. 173(5) Cr.P.C., I am of the “p;§§secutio§:

not made out prime facie._v’tage 1 fox?’

ofienccs aiieged against thcmAfoeAihc’fp_11oefifig ._neas;>ns:

a) The the intervening
night gf statement of
seen the accused
weapons, prima

” Confidence.

of CW-10 Moulasab is not
. _V 4j’:41″s.1′.,_«_:v.VtA£=.-’12!.rv.” statement. He did not inform
Vithe to the complainant. His name does
« V’ 3 _ place in F.I.R. f-Iis statement was recorded
V His statement does not disclose the
.. ‘;$f0£1’¥Y26 of light under which he was able to identify
the accused.

V — The statement of Mylara Growda to the effect that all

the accused armed with deadly weapons were

rcturning in a group to the village

am. on 4.2.2008 prima facic,
confidence. ‘ V. ‘V 4’ ‘V

:3) During the course of
seized a liquor c>f
occurrence of
accused No#’?;’ ” . 1§m§encc of accused
No.7 ‘pea; confirmed.

c) that some

between the family
~- yéars prior to the date of
fcmotc.

1;). \;i¢W«.Qf___«the above, on the basis of ztcavezy of

» ;stq;1e:3:_ aad: i:*Qn rods on the infaztmation said to have been

the petitioners in Cr1.P.No.7425/ 2003 and

tlflé in Crl.P.No.’7498/2008, it is not possible to

3 ‘Ahmad there exists a prima facic case against pctifiauionexs

‘ “‘. fdr’é1legcd ofi’ences. The situation of pctifioncrs fleeing away

” ~ justice and tampering with prosecution Witnesses could

be avoided by imposing suitable conditions. /QJ

9. Therefore, petitions are accepted.

Petitioners in Cr1.P. No.742if”>__/ ‘V L. V’ ‘»

Crl. P. No.7498/ 2003 are m1eased:bfibaflA_.s:ubjec t

conditions:

1) The petitioners s1:ial1,_:éx¢cufé Vhondgj f.Vq:ir V:§;”‘s;Vt’1m of

Rs.5O,O00/-V Sillfltifls fer
the like sum

2) The pggfigiontgré or tamper with
._
attend the Court.

Sd/-»
Judge

 '.       ..... .. 'V