Docid # IndiaLawLib/1305529

(2017) 4 AirKarR 807 : (2018) 1 KCCR 318

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
SINGLE BENCH
( Before : Mr. Budihal R.B., J. )

AJJAPPA — Appellant

Vs.

STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent

Criminal Petition No. 6315 of 2017
Decided on : 09-10-2017

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 439

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 201, Section 302, Section 34

Bail — Prosecution has not made out a case about last seen theory and referring to the charge
sheet material, he submitted that there is no prima facie case against petitioner/accused No. 2
hence, prayed to allow the petition by imposing reasonable conditions — As there are no eye-
witnesses to the incident, so far as illicit connections and the allegations that both committed
the murder is a matter for trial. Investigation is complete and charge sheet is also filed —
Petitioner/accused No2. is ordered to be released on bail for the offence punishable under
Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in Crime — Petition stands allowed.
Counsel for Appearing Parties
Smt. Roopa K.R., Advocate, for the Petitioner; Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP, for the Respondent
ORDER

Budihal R.B., J. - This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No. 2 under section 439 of Cr.P.C., 1973 seeking his
release on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC, registered in respondent
- police station Crime No. 225/2016.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 16.11.2016 at about 9.30 p.m., after searching for the deceased father
everywhere and having no information, lodged a complaint against the petitioner/accused No. 2 and accused No. 1
y
wherein it is alleged that accused No. 1 the mother of the complainant was having illicit connection with accused No. 2
r
ra
and material goes to show that they have committed the murder of the deceased and thrown the dead body. On the
basis of the said complaint, case came to be registered for the said offence against accused Nos. 1 and 2.

L ib
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No. 2 and also the learned High
w
Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
a
aL
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No. 2 made his submission that there are no eye-witnesses to the

d i
incident. The case of the prosecution rests on circumstantial evidence. The learned counsel also made submission that
prosecution has not made out a case about last seen theory and referring to the charge sheet material, he submitted that

In
there is no prima facie case against petitioner/accused No. 2 hence, prayed to allow the petition by imposing reasonable
conditions.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader, during the course of his arguments has submitted that, the
case rests on the circumstantial evidence. At the instance of the present petitioner the dead body was traced. Hence, he
submitted that looking into these materials it goes to show the involvement of the present petitioner in committing the
alleged offence. Hence, he submitted that petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.
7. Admittedly, if according to the prosecution there are no direct witnesses to the alleged incident and case rests on the
circumstantial evidence. It is no doubt as per the prosecution material and voluntary statement of the present petitioner
is stated to have been recorded by the Investigating Officer wherein dead body of the deceased was traced. There is also
allegation of the prosecution that the present petitioner was having illicit connection with accused No. 1. It is accused
Nos. 1 and 2 together committed the murder of the deceased. As there are no eye-witnesses to the incident, so far as
illicit connections and the allegations that both committed the murder is a matter for trial. Investigation is complete and
charge sheet is also filed.
8. The petitioner has contended in the petition that he is innocent and not involved in the alleged offence and is falsely
implicated and he has undertaken to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court.
9. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused No2. is ordered to be released on bail for the offence punishable
under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in Crime No. 225/2016, subject to the following
conditions:
i. Petitioner has to execute a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- and has to furnish one surety for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner has to appear before the concerned Court regularly.

Final Result : A llowed