In the case of murder, bail application rejected: High court of Karnataka

The criminal petition is filed under section 439 of CR.P.C ( special powers of high court or court of session regarding bail) seeking for enlargement on bail for the offence punishable under section 302( punishment for murder), 201( Causing disappearance of evidence of offence or giving false information to screen offender) read with Section 34 of IPC ( Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) and Section 181 of Indian Motor Vehicle Act ( Driving vehicles in contravention of section 3 or section 4) by the petitioner. And the petition was rejected by High court of Karnataka through the learned bench led by the honorable Mr. Justice H P Sandesh in the case of Sri Manoj.G.Gowda vs state of Karnataka ( criminal petition no. 9018/2021) on 20th January 2022.

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner along with other accused persons due to prior enmity inflicted the injury on the victim with knife which was carried in the car and this incident was witnessed by CW2 and 3 and thereafter they took the body of the victim and destroyed the body of the victim throwing to the Yagachi river. Based on the complaint, the police have registered the case, investigated and filed the charge-sheet for the offences.

Arguments presented by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is aged about 19 years working as ambulance driver in the hospital and he is in custody from the last 10 months and prosecution case is mainly based on the confession statement made by the accused persons before the Investigating Officer. The learned counsel brought to notice of this Court that accused no.4 has been enlarged on bail and there is a specific allegation against accused no.4 and there are contradictions in the statements of CW2 and 3 who are the alleged eye-witnesses and the investigation has been completed and there is no need of custodial trial and he may be enlarge on bail.

Arguments presented by the learned High court government pleader appearing on behalf of the state that the specific allegations are made against the petitioner as well as accused no.1 and 2 that this petitioner along with accused no.1 and 2 inflicted the injury with knife and as a result, the victim succumbed to the injuries. The counsel submits that while granting bail to accused no.4, this Court made an observation that he was only accompanied with accused Nos.1 to 3 in a car and there is no overt act allegations made against accused no.4. But there is a prima facie direct evidence against accused nos.1 to 3 and hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

After the keen observation of the statements of the witnesses in the case court came to the conclusion that all of them inflicted injuries with their knives on the body of the victim which ultimately resulted victim’s death, therefore, it is not justified to grant the bail to the petitioner in the present petition on any ground.

Click here to read the judgement

Judgement Reviewed by Sugam Anand Mishra


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat