1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.KEMPANNA
CRL.P.No.5848 OF 2013
BETWEEN:
Sri S R Abhishek
s/o S Raju
Aged about 19 years
r/a.K S R T C Layout
Nelamangala Town & Taluk
Bangalore Rural Dist-562 123.

... Petitioner

(By Sri S Kumar, Adv.)

AND
State of Karnataka
Through Nelamangala Police Station
Represented by the State Public
Prosecutor, High Court of Karanataka
Bangalore-560 001.
... Respondent
(By Sri H M Thimmarayappa, Spl. SPP)
***
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT
THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO
ENLARGE THE PETR. ON BAIL IN CRIME
NO.244/2012 OF NELAMANGALA TOWN, P.S.,

BANGALORE DIST. AND IN C.C.NO.1696/2012 FOR

THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss. 143, 147, 148, 341, 120(B),
307 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AND
SECTIONS 25, 27 OF ARMS ACT.
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:ORDER
The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.29
in CC NO.1696/2012 on the file of the

JMFC,

Nelamangala registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 143, 147, 148, 120B, 341, 323, 324,
302, 307, 427, 506, 114 read with Section 149 of IPC
and under Sections 25 and 27 of the Indian Arms Act,
1959 is before this Court praying for enlarging him on
bail.
2.

It is the case of the prosecution, deceased

B M L Krishnappa was a member of the Zilla

Panchayat,

Bangalore

Rural

District,

Bangalore.

There were differences between him and A1 in

connection with A1 having murdered one Basaiah in
the year 2005, who was a follower of the present

deceased B M L Krishnappa. Further, in retaliation to

the same, in the year 2009, one Devi-brother of A1
had been murdered by the followers of the present
deceased

B M L Krishnappa. Apart from this, A1

and his followers had made an attempt on the life of

the present deceased in the year 2009. On account of
this, they were nursing grudge against each other. It
is the case of the prosecution, the accused in the
case, on account of the rivalry that existed between
A1 and the deceased, hatched a conspiracy to finish
off the deceased. Such conspiracy, according to the
prosecution, had been hatched by the accused in the
case since 10.07.2012. Such being the position, it is
the case of the prosecution, on 25.7.2012, the
deceased accompanied with CWs.1, 2, 12 and 13
proceeded in a Innova Car driven by CW3 towards his
village Arashinakunte, coming within the jurisdiction
of Nelamangala Police Station,

He was followed by

CWs.4, 12 and 13 in another car. Apart from that,

CWs.5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 followed the deceased in Pajero

car.

When the deceased was about to take a

deviation to proceed to his village Arashinakunte near

the service road junction located at NH4, the accused,
who

had

formed

themselves

into

an

unlawful

assembly, armed with deadly weapons and were

waiting for the deceased at the said place sitting in
their respective cars intercepted the car of the
deceased at the said place.

Thereafter, it is alleged

the accused in pursuance of the conspiracy hatched

and in pursuance of the common object of unlawful
assembly, they hackled the deceased after dragging
him out of the car. Further, when CW1 intervened to
rescue the deceased, he was also assaulted by the
accused and attempted to commit his murder. Apart
from this, the other witnesses, who were following the
deceased, among whom CW4-Gunman, who was in
the second car along with CWs.12 and 13, seeing the
deceased being attacked and heckled by the accused,
opened fire with the SBBL gun, which was provided to
him, on the accused. The shot fired by him landed on

A9, who died at the spot. Thereafter, it is the case of

the prosecution, altercations took place between the
two groups in which accused are alleged to have
assaulted and caused injuries to CW3-driver of the
car.

After committing the offence, according to the

prosecution, the accused left the spot.

3.

The present accused, who is accused

No.29, came to be arrested by the Police during the

course of investigation on 30.7.2012 and since then
he is in custody.
4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits

the overt act attributed to this accused is that he had

caused damage to one of the cars by hitting with an
iron rod as revealed from the statements of CWs.6, 11
and 19. He further submits the other material placed
on record is that this petitioner is identified as
accused by CW199, as being present at the time of
occurrence. He further submits except this material
as

against

this

petitioner,

there

are

no

other

circumstances pointing towards his guilt.

The

statements of CWs.6, 11 and 19 have come to be

recorded on 24.7.2012, 27.7.2012 and 28.7.2012
respectively. Apart from the same, further statements
of CWs.11 and 19 have been recorded on 30.7.2012
and 2.8.2012.

Having regard to the delay, in these

witnesses coming out with the version of participation

of the present petitioner in the crime, it does not lend
any credence to rely on the same. Insofar as CW169
is concerned, he submits he does not say that the
petitioner was present at the time of occurrence when
he was shown the accused at the police station.
CW199 no doubt identified this accused in the police
station as one of the accused being present at the
spot.

Their statement has been recorded on3

0.7.2012 and 12.9.2012.

Further CW37 does not

identify this person as accused, though he was

arrested on the very day and was identified by
CW199.

Having regard to the delay in these

witnesses coming out with their version implicating

the petitioner, it does not lend any credence to rely

the same. He further submits an iron rod has been
recovered at the instance of this petitioner.

Since

accused Nos.34, 35, 38 and 41 have been granted bail

by this Court in the very same case as the petitioner
does not stand on a different footing than that of
those accused, the petitioner be also released on bail
since he is in custody from 30.7.2012.
5.

Per contra, Sri H M Thimmarayappa,

learned Special SPP contended the presence of this

petitioner on the spot is spoken to in unequivocal
terms by CWs.6, 11 and 19. He has been identified
by CW199 as the person, who was present at the time
of occurrence.

He further submitted that the said

CW.199 disclosed that this petitioner along with other

accused chased the inmates of Qualis car and scared
them away.

Apart from the same, an iron rod with

which the present petitioner had caused damage to

the car has been recovered at the instance of the

petitioner.

Therefore,

these

materials

would

constitute the offence punishable under Section 302

of IPC as against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner
is not entitled to be released on bail.
6.

Accused Nos.34, 35, 38 and 41 have been

granted bail by this Court. Though CWs.6, 11 and 19

have stated that the petitioner was present at the
time of occurrence and he had caused damage to one
of the car by hitting with an iron rod, which has been
seized at his instance, the said witnesses have come
out with this version belatedly. The identity of this
person as stated by CW.199 is also after lapse of time.
Since the petitioner is in custody since 30.7.2012, as
the investigation is completed and final report has
been filed, there is no justifiable reason to decline the
request of the petitioner.

Accordingly, I pass the

following:
ORDER
Petition is allowed.

(i)

The petitioner is ordered to be released on

bail on his executing a personal bond in a sum of

Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the committal Magistrate or to the
Sessions Judge, if case is committed to the Court of
sessions subject to the following conditions:(ii)

He shall not tamper with the prosecution

witnesses.
(iii)

He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the

Committal Court without the express permission of

the committal Magistrate till the case is committed
and if the case is committed, without the express
permission of the Sessions Judge till the conclusion
of the trial in the case except for attending to the
Court at Bangalore City;
(iv)

He shall also mark his attendance before

the Nelamangala Police Station between 10.00 a.m.

and 3.00 p.m. on every Wednesday and Sunday till
the conclusion of the trial;

10

(v)

If any of these conditions are violated by

the petitioner, the bail granted to him

stands

automatically cancelled and the Court concerned

shall take him to custody forth-with.

Sd/JUDGE

Bkm.