High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 04 KAR CK 0062

MANOJ S/O SRINIVAS vs STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR PS

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 13 April 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rathnakala
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
1579 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 404 words
1.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

2.

The respondent-police have registered an FIR No.688/2016 against three unknown persons. After investigation, charge sheet is filed in respect of the offences punishable under sections 302 and 323 r/w section 34 of IPC against three accused persons. The petitioner is arrayed as A-3.

3.

The allegation of the prosecution is, over a trivial dispute between the accused and the deceased, on 5.12.2016 during night hours, A-1 picked up quarrel with the deceased and CW-2. The deceased attempted to escape from A-2 and A-3. They arrested his hands and A-1 stabbed him with button knife. They inflicted blows on CW- 2 who attempted to rescue the deceased. CW-2 admitted the deceased to the hospital. The complaint is lodged by the father of the deceased. No one is named in the complaint. During the inquest mahazar also, there was no reference to any assailants. The statement of CW-2/injured eye witness is recorded. The petitioner was arrested on

22.12.2016. The statement of the injured witness/CW-2 was recorded on 25.12.2016. As per the statement, he was very much with the deceased during the incident. He took the injured to Koshys hospital in an auto and the Doctor was there advised to go to some other hospital. At the same time, parents of the deceased joined him etc., But the statement of the complainant does not corroborate to these facts. CWs-3, 6 and 7 are also said to be eye witnesses. Their statements are recorded on 26.12.2016 and 20.1.2017. The veracity of the statements of these witnesses is yet to be tested during their cross examination, for the present, there is no impediment to allow the petition.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.688/2016 of respondent-

police, subject to the following conditions:

(i) He shall execute a self bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two local sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. The sureties shall produce their original title deeds pertaining to the immovable properties and their identity/Aadhar card for perusal of the Court. They must not have previous history of offering surety to any accused in any other criminal case so far.

(ii) He shall attend the Court on all hearing dates regularly and punctually.

(iii) He shall not threaten or terrorize the prosecution witnesses.