SHETTEPPA DEVANAND vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.19/2017 registered by the Laxmeshwar P.S. for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 302 504 read with Section 34 of IPC. Due to apprehension of arrest by the Police, this criminal petition is filed seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest along with other grounds urged therein.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent - State.

The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the complaint filed by the complainant alleging that he is the cleaner of lorry and on 05.02.2017 himself and the driver of lorry namely Shivappa Dundappa Dhadrapur @ Gone were proceeding to Hubballi by carrying sand loaded in the lorry. The petitioner who is PSI chased them and made them to stop their lorry near Pashupathihal at about 4.00 a.m. in the wee hours and assaulted the driver with means of his hands, sticks and kicked and threw into the

thorn. As a result of the same, the driver sustained injuries. At the time of incident that the owner of the lorry came and requested the accused to release the said lorry but the accused demanded a sum of Rs.70,000/-. Accordingly, the owner of the said lorry was agreed to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- and also paid Rs.12,000/- and further informed that remaining amount will be paid on the next day and requested the accused to get the lorry released. The lorry owner instructed the complainant to drop the driver to his

house. Accordingly when the complainant dropped the driver to his house at 5.00 a.m., the said driver- Shivappa collapsed at his house and the parents of Shivappa took him to the private hospital at Battur wherein the doctor had adviced to shift him to Laxmeshwar Hospital. It is further alleged that the complainant came to know that Shivappa has died at about 10.00 a.m. and the complainant came to Lakshmeshwar and saw that Shivappa's dead body is kept in front of Laxmeshwar Police Station and several persons had gathered there. On the basis of the complaint, a case came to be registered against the accused. Thereafter proceeded with the case for investigation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner during his argument contended that the complaint has been drafted by an Advocate as the information given by the informant to him and based upon the information.

That the complaint is drafted in writing and filed before the respondent-Police. Whereas the learned counsel vehemently contended that the allegations made in the complaint have set up to register the case

against the accused and roped in the alleged crime alleging that the accused insisted the owner of lorry to provide a sum of Rs.70,000/- and on the insistence made by the accused, the owner of the lorry who gave Rs.12,000/- and assured that remaining amount will be provided on the next day. This theory is also set up by the complainant in order to file a complaint.

But there is no material in this regard. It is further contended that the complaint is drafted by an Advocate. It is further contended that the death is not caused because of the assault made by the accused with means of hands, sticks and kicked by their legs but because of cardiac arrest but the same has been narrated in the complaint just to give harassment to the accused with an oblique motive. It is further contended that the entire material allegation in the complaint does not disclose directly against this accused that this accused has caused the death of the deceased but he has lugged into the alleged crime mere because he being the PSI and also on 05.02.2017 at about 4.00 a.m. in the wee hours has been chased the lorry which is driven by the deceased for transportation of sand without having any valid permission. Therefore, this accused who is absconding since from committing alleged offence due to apprehension of arrest by the police is seeking anticipatory bail. As there is no reason to the accused to commit the offence and cause the death of the deceased as narrated in the complaint. It is further contended that the petitioner is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail to him. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner praying for anticipatory bail.

On the other hand, learned HCGP for the State who is vehemently contended on 05.02.2017 at about 4.00 a.m. in the wee hours the petitioner has assaulted the deceased and as a result of that he died.

It is further contended that the case is under investigation by the Investigating Officer. He further contended that if the petitioner is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and would destroy the evidence and therefore, he prays for dismissal of the bail petition.

Keeping in view of the contention which has taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and as well as the learned HCGP relating to the case in Crime No.19/2017, it is relevant to state that on 05.02.2017, the complaint which is drafted by one Advocate by name M.N.Badagi of Laxmeshwar has written the complaint alleging that the accused insisted the owner of the lorry demanding a sum of Rs.70,000/- to release the lorry and he has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- and thereafter he paid only Rs.12,000/- and remaining amount will be given later on and also narrated that the accused assaulted the deceased with means of his hands, sticks and kicked by his legs but there is no material to substantiate the

same. It also seen from the complaint that there is no mention about the number of the lorry in which the deceased and the complainant had transporting the

sand. However, subsequent to registration of crime, the case is taken up by the Investigating Officer and investigation is to be completed and has to lay the charge sheet against the accused. So far as this incident is concerned, another complaint in Crime No.21/2017 is registered and in all more than 100 accused have been lugged into crime. The Investigating Officer investigated the case and laid the charge sheet against the accused in Crime No.21/2017. It is still under investigation. Therefore, keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, it is said that it does not require for any detailed discussion, while considering the bail petition filed by the petitioner, as there are substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking for the relief of bail.

Whereas, the learned HCGP submits that if the petitioner is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and would destroy the evidence. As this apprehension expressed by the learned SPP, could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as under the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is deserving for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby allowed, subject to the following conditions:

The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of Laxmeshwar Police Station in Crime No.19/2017 within a period of 20 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute his personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with likesum two sureties to the satisfaction of him in the event of his arrest;

The petitioner shall co-operate with I.O. during the course of investigation, if necessary;

The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and hamper the investigation;

The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in fortnight as per the English Monthly Calendar till laying of charge sheet before the SHO in between 10 am to 5 pm;

The petitioner shall not indulgence with any criminal activities henceforth.

If the petitioner violates any of the conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.