High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Jamal Sab vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri Jamal Sab vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 December, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
IN ms HIGH COURT 01:' KARNATAKAMI:  

CIRCUYI' BENCH AT DHARWAD 

DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY 0;? 'DECEIvi'BEvI{[ 'étgdfsv   V

BEFORE   ' ' Q
THE HON'BLE MR   N.._Am5u§j;§2i..;v"""' 
cRL.1é..No.738§/'2oG3FA_ .' 
BEFWEEN: V  %  V' 

Sri Jancjan@Ja_:3ia1 say; V  .  .
S/olbrahim S}::ai}~«:h,'  2;  
Aged about 2.3 * '  " " .

Occ: Driver;     
Kumta,    .. FEFITIGNER

(By Sri T.M.$ada1;'%Ad&oc;§i;)" A

  _«*.x~_I_1:_2:%;[  

. _ q 'V : of iKa;'nata.ka,
 Rap. "by"K1:£mta,_Po1ice Station,

"Dis«€':__ U Kaafpada,
Represented. 1:-y' the State Pubiic:
Pmsecutgir,  Court ofKarz1ata1<a,

 CiIcuit..Bt:pch at Dhalwad. .. RESPONDENT

 ".. '(By;Sri wand K. Navalgimath, HCGP)

' This petition is filed under Section 439 C3z*.P.C. praying

   .t._o:§enJargc the petitioner on batik in Crime No.118/2008 of
 Kumta Pofice 1'11 c.c.No.'?'8€)/ 2008 on the file of the 3M¥?C,
~ Kumta.

This petition coming on for orders this day, the (301111:
made the following:



ORDER

The petitioner is in cusmdjf

registered for ofiences punishahle 376′;

201 r/W. 341.1>.c.

2. The petitioner Nov. 1A Q-eiong with
accused No.2–P1axfeen to have
committed about 12 years
Urvvd commitfede, the dead body in an
Visoiatefi of evidence. The

incident piace on 7.5.2008.

JAS” lodged by the father of the
__C1aughter aged about 12 years was found
(311 15.5.2003, they traced a dead body

–V in iiecomposeé state. The matter was reported to the

K case was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. On

I i:-22§5;’2oos. statement of CW.11–Chandru was recorded.
‘ “CW. 1 1, a boy aged about 14 years has g1\’zen the statement to
the efiect that on 7.5.2008, CW.11 and victim giri were

picking mango fruits near the house of CW.10-Nagarathna.

At that time, accused 1 and 2 came there
away the victim girl. They also heldthreats u u

of curiosity, Chandra followed the am

comznitting rape on the -left; the * L’

place and did not inforra “£é’__8–3l’A}’ibne. 011
22.5.2008, he inforzmecvlu father of the victim

4. The H 1: would reveal

that 01):, t’r-1Ei’.V1;’t- ‘II “a;’mI:, she had seen the girl
pic1dn§’.._up’– lier house. At that time, she

had seen egceueeti Axrgoviuiig near that place.

. V. – «V V” poseonofietiiittexaminafion report would reveal that

in a highly decomposed state. In the final

oiztiiaion, that death was due to asphyxia following

“-smotheitinfg of face and nostrils.

‘ “5. I have heard the Ieamezi Counsel for accused No.1

Vt V’ the learned Government Advocate for the State.

6. The learned Counsel for petitioner has made the

‘2
foliowin submissions; 5

I. The entire incriminating evidence _

accused is found in the state11iexi’t..VVof1i’1’~? u

Chandm who is a planted »*.x;ri1:z1e’ss..Vv’4’u{‘iie4eoudneé.’ V
of CW1} keeping silent ~e’22.»5.2.2(:)’O8′”
belie his statementihat the”-aecusevde took é:;w.at_-‘,* ,

the victim girl and ‘eofi;mitted’–:epeen hm»)

ii. That as the ~.i:;1queet and
the the height
of the vdead.”ood§§”Awasé.”‘2_ “The victim girl
was’ afloat “£’.–s’: per the statement
of the victim gr} was

there is no conclusive

it proofitirsntificafion of the dead body.

_.¥{I. ii of accused No.1 was to be
1 .ee1e’of’at:z+::,i…i:3’n 18.5.2008. Therefore, he was busy

_V ggarfiagc preparations and he has been
V ‘ ievéiz-gtsely implicated.

‘?*.Vv”‘i’.he learned Government Advocate would submit

A 1 1-Chandra had no motives to falsely implicate the

aeeuseé. Having regard to the age of CW.11-Chandra and in

the circumstances of the case, his silence till 22.5.2008

would not iead to an inference that he is a planted witness.

The parents of the victim girl had no motives to falseiy

implicate the accused. So also CW. ‘
motives to falsely implicate thief V
statcmfint, she had seen the accuseifi. ,
befom missing of the victim ._any é:vcj::t,– Eiéihménts ‘V
of CW.10 and 11 am su$cicnt—tgfffzoid. flvietimiigirl was
last seen alive in the ¢.=_fv 2.

3. consgaigggg e~19*:£i:geA. girl and the
cixcumstanci-£3; of commission of
her mtgrtiéix for gain can safely be

ruled oft,’ ” V

9;’ the learned Counsel for pctitiencr and

Gfiycmment Advocate and having gone through

I find, CW.11-Chandra had no

mofivgs statement against the accused. CW.1 1-

fias aged about 14» years. Even if he had not seen

.._eiEcuscd committing rape on the victim girl, his

V. gtaftcmcnt, victim gr} was fercibly taken by the accused and

she was Iast seen alive in the company cf the accused,

caunot be susyectcd at this stage of the case. So also, the

2′;

W ,~ g

statement of CW. 10 that the accused were moving around

her house on ‘?.5.2008 before the victim gr} was ”

cannot be suspected at this stage.

10. The dead body was found’

state and it was partly eaten away ._

considering the discrcpancy ofof clcad ‘V

.3: ~ .2hc«§a?=>i.e’2*»ez3Lz’-€f’* Liv 55 W94′
body of the victim girl “is .no!:§jh£—-dc;ad of ‘ fly: victim girl,
mom particularly when it was ‘i;icz;ytificd_ byihe father of the

victim ai. vvgimss other articles found on
the déatihotiy. ‘ . b 1

, -13.1 afomotatcd circumstances, at this stage

r tizocasc, “itis nofjioosiblc to hold that CW. 1 1- Chandra is

.__&1:

I .Tiic learncti Counsel for petitioner would submit

.. Illéfcwas inordinate delay in lodgng the complaint and

fficoxfling statements of material wimesses.

12. The victim giri was last seen alive on 7.5.2008. Her
dead body was found on 35.5.2008. At the first instance, a

case was zcgistcred under Section 174 Cr.P.C. It is only after

3′-6:’ Lr _,… ‘s

information was It-vcalcci by CW.1 –«
incriminating evidence against j. fins”: «V
record. if the parents of the
interested to falsely fimt V
instance, the Police wonjd. cnse under

Section 174 Cr. RC.

13. of oflbnces,
at this stage, n be released on bail.

Acc01ti?jngly,_ is d.iS§1£1jsscd.

Sd/-E
Iudgé

Etsi, :