High Court Karnataka High Court

Shri Deepak S/O Parashuram … vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Shri Deepak S/O Parashuram … vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 February, 2010
Author: Arali Nagaraj
 Srii.P.__.E~l.fCfrotiil+i»'hindi, HCGP.)

IN THE. §""lI(}IAl COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH
AT Dl~lARWAD 

DATED "mas '1'm=: tn" DAY or: FEZBRUARY 2.9

B E F 0 RE,

'1'1~1[~: HoN*aLt3 MR. JUSTICEEE. A;RK.1fi;'1' «N2tGAiIi{i5L:'i_  
CRL.P. N0.8'fl9?./2069'.  V

BETWEEN:

Sh:"i.Deepak   :  -
S/0. Parashuram Gov.i.ndl<arn@.K=ala[« i ii
Age: 25 years, Ocg'~v:'B_Ltej':3ine_ss,€  ,  
R/o. H.No.34, A.s--h'ray5a_Covlony,  in

Navanaga1',Baga_1kot',». ' V' .. i
. --------   ii "*1:;._ _ C' . ' ii   ...Petitioner.

(By Sri.Rait3,_akti.sililh'aVG:i'=Dh«oh-gadif, Advocate.)
AND: _ . _ .. . , _.

The State._§of Karnatalga,
R'jep1*esen.téda_b.y 'PS1, """ "
Town :PoI_iceV Sta.ti"e,n,
Bagla-l1{o_t.7  " C' C'

" " ' ...Respondent.

C C 4' ..jo'w»Thi"a._Criminal Petition is filed U/S.439 Cr.P.C. by the
fj._°ad"v.oca't*e for the petitioner praying that this Hon'ble Court
 b§€ pleased to allow the petition and enlarge the
 ipe_t'it»i--oiner (A.2) on bail in S.C.No.54/2009 (in Bagalkot
 f.T_o;wn P.S. Crime No.26/2008) on the file of Special
"a(Siessions) Judge, Bagalkot, from the custody.

c...s*-



Ix)

This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court
made the foilowing:

ORDER

The petitioner herein is onemof thc”9’v*2i:c»cus.edAV in V

Crime No.26/2008 of Bagaikot Town’R.s;f(s.C.sNo.f54/’:j0o9;_f

pending on the file of the iearned_V:VS~p_ecié1’i (Sessiv:on«:s)”–3.L1dge, * ii

Bagalkot, which is filed for theooi-ofiiencets U/iSec._g_1,.47, 148,

400, 120-3, 396, 302, 201 1’ii/’i\»ii\r*.t._Se*4i’c–.4ff=i’i¢.!~:’9 §1′,n§cs.._This petition

is opposed by the:..p’3*oSjecu§tion .:by”.fiiiiiiif£”i.gv.’v§ii’iitt€I1 objections

to it. “”” -.

2) Heard tthe’V..air’gi,A’utn’o.nits”iof both the sides. Perused
the chargeiisheet s”t:..b_£nitte’ci by the prosecution in the said

case-..A’1so p_er.us.ed,the other materiai produced on record by

both the..s.i’deVs’ii.”_”§:._

case of the prosecution is that, on 6/2/2008

p.m. accused No.1 to 9 therein entered into

iithieiwhc-use of the deceased Laxminarayan, the Junior Uncle

the complainant Dwaraka S/o.Nandakishor Rathi of

r”~”~(“~”””

Bagalkot City and committed murder of the said

Laxminarayan and also his wife Snit.Kashi Leelava’thii»~_ian_Vd

took away from the said house cash and gold orna–:iniein”tVis.1;p*~.. .

4) Initially FIR came to bev.:i*ss–ued

unknown accused for the offence

is the specific case of the p1’osecu-tyiiion that;.rrii1yr’cler:,>oit”hoth
the deceased was coinrnitted ‘ accused while
committing dacoity in their ho’usVe.i.”_ii

5) On ca_1*e?fu;’l riéaaniig tort theft averments in the
. . i . ‘I VA A’ ,’ d0
complaint it could’be..,_s’e.eni..tha_t the said averments % not
disclose that “any c’ash’.iA’or”*–gold ornaments were found
missing fr_:’o1n’~the saidphouvse. “f:lzart- both the deceased were
_” . A. ….. .. Hf?

the*.oni_y-»pVer.sons.,_r’esiding in the said house at the time of

7″m,_ovccurrenc’e ofithfe incident’, fhere is no evidence of any eye

_l_fw._itnesses to the incident of murder or dacoity. Therefore

i’~.i_’filC ‘p.ro.sec’ution has relied upon the circumstantial evidence.

‘:7l’h.e:on?l.y circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is,

iV._it’l*i~e/recoveries made at the instance of the respective

r______r~’-u—.—-~\..a–

accused. It is the case of the prosecution that, the_..gold

bangles came to be recovered from the house”

petitioner–aceused pursuant to his voluntary staten__ient…iii’

6) Further, there is no circuiiiistaneesi’–such’–.ais=’extra.i

judiciary confession of the preseint.__petitioner or”ia.tfiy,_VQf_r§the

accused being; seen by any”witness:”e..i:tite_r the
house of the deceased or said house at
the relevant time ot’4occ_urre’nci’e– Only on the
basis of have been worn by
the deceased”Sint.i.il<v£iiShiiififVi';ee'lavatiihiiifltiicould not be held that
this petitioner.vvasireisvjsittiijit.sii'b_l&:eteiircausing death of the said

deceased__._

_VVCharVge:*sheet has been submitted in the said

:7W_case. Etgis~'staite.'d–: the statement of objections that this

_ia.c.<4:'Liis_ed ha.siiW:_bieien involved in Crime No.20/2008 of

Bagalkot, for the offences U/Secs.302 and

ii and also in Crime No.10/2008 of'Adarsha Nagar

WW

'J:

P.S., Bijapur. But, no further material is produced on

record to substantiate the same.

8) It is also not stated in the statemenit_i7.of

objections as to which are the offences alleged

petitioner in Crime No.10/2008

Bijapur. It is not even stated whether th’_’is~”peti_ti’o_rieri

bail or in EC in the said .

c”‘~””””””7

9) Having regard t:iheV_ifac.ts:i’a–nd ciriciurhstances

of the case as observed Asuvpr.a,ii__l the present

petitioner diiaserx/iei’si’i’;~.hg_ bail. Hence the following:

i .o1RiolI:;-R
Thegp-1″esent.lP9._l_illi’ioniii’Filed U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C. by the

piewtvitiiioner of the accused in S.C.No.54/2009 on

the fil.ei’iiopf; iiSp’e.c_iaiil”(Sessions’) Judge, Bagalkot, is hereby

ii”alilogwed.iiiiiThi”*s&Vipeititionenaccused shall be enlarged on bail

fonil1isifur..nisihing a self bond for Rs.40,000/~ along with two

r__”_f'”‘\r\-_..—\_,

sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Tria}

Court, and subject to conditions that:

a) he shall mark his attendance

the SHO of Bagalkot Town Iv’.-i.’S’.»,..4Aon5r::e

fortnight preferably on every1′:taiter’na’tiike:i

Sunday between 1Q-00 a.n*-‘. and 02700 p.m.” .tiv1.i_H
the conclusion oftrial in t-I:mst’S_e’ss_ions’-C/as’e.

b) heshat:au§ad:he;r£aa;ooarton aH
the dates of f:i’i~lv.ii’ti.’rV;.]iess his
personal atte’nd’-aniice is for valid
reasons. H 1 ii it V

6} ._heishaslxli”vno’ti,_i”‘d..i_rec.tly or indirectly,
tamper with the»piroseeut_io<1'iievidence nor shali

he th_r.e_aten it"i'.¢i pro'se¢*uti"on witnesses.

order shall be sent forthwith to the

TriaIiiiCo'i1rti the PSI of Bagafkot Town P.S., for

'77__information andieompliance.

V_»Maa-

Sd/-3
JUDGE