High Court Karnataka High Court

Sadashiv vs State Of Karnataka on 5 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sadashiv vs State Of Karnataka on 5 February, 2010
Author: Arali Nagaraj
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

CRICUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 05"' DAY or FEBRUARY, 20'i.Q::..".'>".~V.VV

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE ARAL1 N;IG'A"R.AIA"I~:  E'  E'

CRIMINAL PETITION NOg73§_l'<3f/2«()1I_\()"' I  

BETWEEN:

3..

Sri.Sadashiv __

S/0 Siddu Dhanagar

Aged 55 years  -  1,'; I 
Occ: Agriculture/Shepherd I  " 

sri.Manade§;Ijj" 

S,/--o--~~S.i_'c:idI!vI i5'I:2;a.na'g'a  E'
Aged 48.Ey.ear's_  _
  _  

S ri .  ra m  

5 8/9 Ma"nadev7'Dh°anagar
I"-I«aAI9ed 20 vearsIII.I
" O»;rLc:Shepherd

_-  
.  S/0 --S:aC|:E]S|'1iV Dhanagar
 Aged 20 years

Qcczshepherd

 Sri.Shankar
w  S/0 Mahadev Dhanagar

Aged 18 years
Occ:Shepherd

r~/""'"



6. Sri.Vitha| @ Vithappa
S/0 Siddu Dhanagar
Aged 48 years
Occzshepherd

7. Sr'§.HaEappa
S/0 Véthal Dhanagar   
Aged 18 years 
Occzstucient

8. Sr'i.Vasant
S/0 Jyoti Dhanagar
Aged 35 years
Occshepherd

9. Smt.Bagawwa  

W/o Siddu:Dhana'gar"g _  
(D/0 eagavgwa Dhariag"ar)"   
Aged;-6'O"'y_e;a.rs'--_ " j_    »
Occ:HQusehoId"'woVri<if_- '_  

A1! are rm. \{a'dra04r'H/ii|a_ge

Tq:F:a§bVagHf-~._  
DistV;Be|gau__m-..V".     PETITIONERS

(By S3ri.:E3an'1uac.f1'a'nac.:i'ra "A um, Adv)

' The  Vofaéiarnata ka

Rejz;-... by' Rafi-ba'g"PoE§ce
Now rep. .b_y;.-State PP
High' Cdu'rt'of Karnataka Building

V'~-Circuit Bench, Dharwad  RESPONDENT

1,fl.”_’A(E3y S’F§ZP.H.G0tkhindi, HCGP)

This Crl.P is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

“;’j[ray§ng to enlarge the petitéoners on bail in Raibag PS

#1-

DJ

Crime No.285/2009 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 326, 341, 302′,_SQ4,

506 read with 149 of IPC on any terms and cojnd.i_tio’n.s

which this E-ion’b|e Court may deem fit.

This Cr£.P is coming on for Orders this..da4y,.Vt’t§Ae:’C:_ourt”i 3

made the foilowingz

oRoEnjT3°

Accused Nos.1 to ins’

Cr.No.28S/2009 (cc No,.33/.20-1£ui)”g’:of”–Raioag’Poiice Station
District Beigaum pendingiiionthe:fii’e”Vc)_f:’.ét’h»eV learned JMFC,
Raibag have fiied;’tVh_e p.eti.t»i–o’n..Vun;der’Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. prosecution by
fiiing the arguments of both

2. 3 course of arguments,

Sri..R§ama~chandra..:_{§___.Mali, iearned Counsel for the

‘pietitioi’7IVél’S-*fl:CCLiSed submit that he does not press this

respect of petitioner Nos.1 to 5 who are

-V resp’ect§’$1«eihyxvaccused Nos.1 to 5 in the said case. In view

‘:g,o:”‘ithis submission, the present petition has to be dismissed

ha-snot pressed in respect of petitioners Nos.1 to S.

(-~.~.S/m\”‘.”‘”\…./’

¢~I:’Z”‘°

3. On careful reading of the avermentSin.__ the

complaint filed by one Smt.SavEtha) the wife-‘j”o§f”*r.the

deceased Ramu Puthane, it could be«seen4’::”thafV’ihiilf”

specifically alleged therein that
8.00 pm. while the complainant,aéfl»”h_e’r sore _Rake.srs_,:”‘hue’r.._

deceased husband Rama ahd.t__an_othei .deceav-se”df’lvialappa ” ‘

Shivappa Puthane, the.eldera_.l9rot.her.?AoF ‘deceas.e§d Ramu,
and also one Shivappa ‘Gang’a_pjpa PuthaVn’e.,V the father—-in-
law of the compiainarjt w’ez:e.a~l.lf~.iV_n the-i’r land, can the

.r

accused Nos..i._ fee.-16 4.fq_rmed-.” themselves into unlawful
assemaiy—-.heidilriél’I::,axes.;-.i?vood–en.”§clubs and stones and

attacked the and the deceased Mallappa
with the é;3:JI4said._w’.eapo’:1s. It is further alleged in the
* V ..,..:*-T’ Nu-f, «-f””:-7′

said’~icori”i;1laint”tha_tTog1, 2, 4 and 8 namely Sadashiva,

*lVlai1.ade_v’a,Eeerappa and Jyothiba together assaulted the

udeceasedV’«RLart2:=tz”»and thereby caused his death and pa, 5, 6
. ‘ A.

andhlllllz””tes’oectively Sidram @ Siddu, Shankar, iNEngappa

if.and-~._\/ijallya together assaulted the deceased Mallappa and

— lthgelreby caused his death. It is further alleged in the said

.«rt’.” /}r:_¢4.sJK.a;>{ !\lg~,,3_ c-¢:”””””‘

it “complaint that 57, 9 to 11, 13 to 15 together assaulted the
rx

<*"*—-fF\"'""""'\«-'

injured Shivappa, the father-in–law of the comp|ainan,t__and

thereby infiicted on him severai grievous injuries. 1jt'is"'aViso

aiieged in the said compiaint that A16

,_r"'.'»""

r-“”.”~’

restrained the compiainantw and i§ai_é_<esh,

when they tried to rescue the said icece_ased;iit"

4. Thus it is clear fromthe above–.aiiegati’or1gof the
1
compiainant that the case against »peti’tioner§ 6 to 8 who

are respectiveiyflafl, 9 and .11v’V__is:th’atV.’A.?1vX!-ithai»assaulted
the injured shsv’;e;.tg%;pa.”~:vit%ij~ha’nd:’ai’n’Vdt._..:egs, A11 Vasanth

assauited vi-_§Vth:fi_44_”¢£_uVb’s’ vi~ia|’ap’pa assauited the said

injureciwith t.hVereby infiioted grievous injuries on
the person” of ‘the ‘:.?js=a>id~..g:i’nju”red. Further, the allegation

againstgA3’.E6 is doetitioner No.9 herein namely

y uuuuu «~r-.~:~ ~”r
“~Smt–.Ba’g’aw’wa is oniy that she restrained the

‘s…Co.rnpira,i_h–a_n’t and her son when they tried to intervene and

reissue th~e’_d–et:eased. Therefore, I am of the opinion that

” 9,” if and 16 who are respectiveiy petitioner Nos.6 to 9

A r.yyheregi.;i1 are not alieged to have committed any overtact on

K

pf”/fl’

either of the deceased but they are aiieged to have
«ii-L

inflicted grievous injuries on the person of injured.
1’\.,

5. Whether these petitioners-accused iii

furtherance of common object of unlawful avssembiflyis _

fact to be found during triai of thehicase.’ «.vT”herefofre.,VV~I:’ho|d7
that ends of justice would beyomet w’i-t_h;..if the,SC–;.pet’itioinei”;
Nos.6 to 9 who are respectivie.ly»r5–7, 9,11.-iarad: 16 are

granted bail subject co_n,c|iit.iyons. H'”Hence, the

foilowing:

‘2_*VheiV flied’ under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. isudismiss_e’d?fas”not’pressed in respect of petitioner

Nos.:1-to 5 are respectively accused Nos.1 to S in the

. .°-sai”d- “i’E’yurthevr;”‘thVe present petition is hereby allowed

“oVti’a~.p_etitioner Nos.6 to 9 who are respectively

acAc.:4J__sec_£,~~i\i’_o;<,.;.7, 9, 11 and 16 in the said case. These

– — .-9. Nos.6 to 9 shall be enlarged

on each of them furnishing a self bond for a sum of

__R§s.30,00D/~ aiongwith one surety for the Iikesum to the

<—-r»v'\«w""

C:-I”‘7″_~
satisfaction of the committal Court subject to it-“e

conditions that:

a) they shall not threaten the pro’Seeo:t;on

witnesses.

b) they shait attend the:—T”ri»al« Cour’_t4 on4_ail»:/_jthé,A Vt

dates of hearing

attendance is disoe.n”s~e%d wit’r~..__for.§}a]id’~–;fé’a’sons.
A COPY of this order sbaai’%-hbiettéent r¢e::»;w:t5 to the

Triai Court for information and-c5mpi.iatnfce.”‘

sd/-2
t JUDGE