1 Between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 20 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.200106/2017 Mallappa @ Mallikarjun S/o Kanthappa Police Patil Age: 35 years, Occ: Agriculture R/o Ankalagi Village Tq. and Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ishwar Raj S. Chowdapur, Advocate)... Petitioner And: The State of Karnataka (Through Mahagaon Police Station) Represented by Addl. State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri P.S.Patil, HCGP)... Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to allow the petition and release the petitioner on bail in S.C.No.136/2016 pending before I- Additional Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi, which is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 302, 109, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC.
2 This petition is coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:- ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail in Crime No.05/2016 (S.C. No.136/2016 pending on the file of I-Additional Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi) of Mahagaon Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 302, 109, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC. 2. The brief factual matrix that emanate from the charge-sheet papers are that a person by name Chitambaraya is a social worker and also relative of a lady by name Gangubai. The said Chitambaraya and all the accused persons and also Gangubai are the residents of Ankalagi village and there was dispute between them with regard to Sy.No.22/1 measuring 05 acres. It is also undisputed fact that the parties are fighting for their rights before the Civil Court. In this
3 background it is alleged that on 20.01.2016 the said Chitambaraya went to the said land in support of the said Gangubai for the purpose of harvesting on the ground that they have actually grown the crop. Having come to know about the same, the petitioner and other accused persons formed an unlawful assembly went to the said land at about 07.30 a.m. and started quarrelling with the Chitambaraya and others. In fact, Chitambaraya also started quarrelling with the accused persons and told the accused persons that the said land does not belong to them. On the other hand, the accused persons asserted that the said land belongs to them. In this background it is alleged that the accused persons started abusing and assaulting the deceased- Chitambaraya. Accused No.6 standing at a distance instigated and abated other accused persons to do away with the life of the deceased. There are eyewitnesses to the incident. The eyewitnesses by name Devendrappa, Mastan and Sharanappa, have categorically stated in
4 their statements in this context there was quarrel between the parties. It is alleged particularly accused Nos.4 and 5 have caught hold the said Chitambaraya in order to enable other accused persons to assault the deceased. When these two persons caught hold Chitambaraya, accused No.1 by name Kalyanrao @ Kalyani took a stone and assaulted 2-3 times on the head of the deceased which caused severe bleeding injuries on the head and due to such injuries, Chitambaraya succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-state. 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that the alleged incident has taken place abruptly in view of the civil dispute pending between the parties. It is also contended that
5 accused No.5 who stands on the similar footing as that of the petitioner has already been released on bail therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is further contended that the petitioner is in custody since more than one year and he is a permanent resident of Ankalagi village and has got both movable and immovable properties, therefore, there is no chance of he being absconded. It is further contended that if the petitioner is released on bail, he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and he is ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition. 5. On the contrary, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-state vehemently contended that there are eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and there is allegation in the complaint and the statement of the eyewitnesses that accused Nos.4 and 5 have tightly caught hold of the
6 deceased and instigated accused No.1 to assault severely on the head of the deceased and as such, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. He further contended that at this juncture, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution witnesses, he may abscond and he may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. I have gone through the copy of the FIR, complaint and other material produced along with the petition. 7. The factual aspect discloses that the accused persons went to the land and started quarreling with the deceased and they abused and assaulted the deceased with stones and sticks on his head. The only allegation, which has been made against accused No.4 is that he himself and accused No.5 have caught hold of the deceased and at that time, accused No.1 assaulted
7 severely on the head of the deceased. Except that allegation, no other overt-act has been made against accused No.4. When that being the case, and as the charge sheet is said to have been filed, I feel that the custodial continuation of the said accused/petitioner is not necessary that too when he is ready to face the trial. In that light, if the petitioner is released on bail by imposing stringent conditions, it would meet the ends of justice. 8. For the above reasons, the petition is allowed and petitioner/accused No.4 is ordered to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two solvent sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
8 ii. The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly; iii. The petitioner shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; iv. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly for facing the trial. Sd/- JUDGE NB* Ct: MHS