High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 10 KAR CK 0019

N.P. Manjunath vs State Of Karnataka By The Station House Officer Krishnaraja Police Station Mysuru - 570001 Represented By Spp High Court Of Karnataka Bengaluru - 560001

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 13 October 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
S Vishwajith Shetty, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 9184 Of 2023

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

13 paragraphs · 793 words

S Vishwajith Shetty, J

1.

Accused No.1 in Crime No.69/2023 registered by Krishnaraja Police Station, Mysuru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 34 of IPC, is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.PC.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3.

On the basis of the complaint by Premakumari w/o late Chandrappa dated 27.8.2023, FIR in Crime No.69/2023 was registered by the Krishnaraja Police Station, Mysuru City, against accused no.1 and five others for the aforesaid offences. It is the case of the complainant that the complainant had five children and her second daughter was given in marriage to deceased Mahadevaswamy, who was residing at Mysuru. Her son-in-law Mahadevaswamy was doing the brokerage business in RMC vegetable market. From the wedlock, the couple had two children, aged about 16 and 15 years. On 27.8.2023, the complainant was informed that her daughter, son-in-law and their children were found dead in their house. Immediately, she rushed to Mysuru along with her son and found the dead bodies of her daughter, son-in-law and their children, which were in a decomposed condition. The complainant and her son allegedly also recovered a death note from the house of the deceased, wherein it was mentioned that the accused persons were the cause for the death of the deceased. It is in this background, the complainant had approached the police and lodged the complaint, which had resulted in registering FIR against accused no.1 and others. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested. Petitioner's bail application filed in Crl.Misc.No.1728/2023 before the Court of V Additional Sessions Judge, Mysuru, was dismissed on 11.09.2023. Therefore, he is before this Court.

4.

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that accused no.2 & 3 as against whom there are similar allegations, have been granted anticipatory bail in Crl.P.No.9061/2023 & Crl.P.No.9073/2023, and accused no.4, 5 & 6 have been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.9101/2023 & Crl.P.No.9787/2023. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

5.

Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the bail petition. However, she does not dispute that accused nos.2 & 3 have been granted anticipatory bail in Crl.P.No.9061/2023 & Crl.P.No.9073/2023, and accused no.4, 5 & 6 have been granted regular bail in Crl.P.No.9101/2023 & Crl.P.No.9787/2023.

6.

FIR in Crime No.69/2023 was registered against the petitioner and five others on the basis of the complaint filed by Smt.Premakumari w/o late Chandrappa, who is the mother-in-law of deceased Mahadevaswamy. It appears that Mahadevaswamy had entered into an agreement for sale with the petitioner on 17.6.2023. In the death note, which is recovered from the house of the deceased, it is mentioned that after Mahadevaswamy realized that he would not be in a position to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the petitioner herein, he had approached him and sought for cancellation of the agreement, for which petitioner had not agreed. On a perusal of the complaint averments as well as the death note, which was allegedly found in the house of deceased, it is very clear that the ingredients which are required for the purpose of attracting the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC is absent. For the purpose of attracting an offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, the act committed by the accused persons should have either added or abetted the deceased to commit the act of suicide and there should be a proximity between the two acts. Such ingredients are not found in the case on hand. Accused nos.2 & 3 against whom similar allegations are made have been granted anticipatory bail in Crl.P.No.9061/2023 & Crl.P.No.9073/2023, and accused no.4, 5 & 6 have been granted regular bail in Crl.P.No.9101/2023 & Crl.P.No.9787/2023. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the following order:

7.

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.69/2023 registered by Krishnaraja Police Station, Mysuru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.