SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mr.Mahadev S/O Chandrappa Lamani vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 July, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 22 N D DAY OF JULY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101261/2021

BETWEEN:

Mr. Mahadev S/o. Chandrappa Lamani,
Age:31 years, Occ: Coolie Driver
R/o: Hulikeri Thanda, Tq: Saundatti,
Dist: Belagavi
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI PRATIK SHIPURKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

The State of Karnataka,
Through Malmaruti P.S.,
Represented by Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad-580 001
… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI RAMESH B. CHIGARI, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.04.2021
PASSED BY THE V ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI IN CRL.MISC.
NO.313/2021 IN SESSIONS CASE NO.51/2021
2

REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
498A AND 302 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF
IPC
AND ALLOW THE PRESENT PETITION AND PASS
AN ORDER ENLARGING THE PETITIONER ON
BAIL WHO IS IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY FROM
11.04.2020.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This petition is filed by the sole accused

under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the

Cr.P.C.’, for brevity) seeking bail in Crime

No.35/2020 of Malamaruthi Police Station,

registered for the offences punishable under

Sections 498A and 302 read with Section 34 of

The Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to

as the ‘IPC’, for brevity).

2. It is the case of the prosecution that one

Devappa Lamani has filed a complaint stating
3

that on 02.04.2020 at about 3.00 p.m. the

petitioner and the deceased Rukmavva wife of

the petitioner had quarreled in their home

being a room provided by one Mr. Baluram

Patil who is the owner of the Body Building

Garage situated in the premises of Harikaka

Compound, Gandhi Nagar, Belagavai. The said

quarrel was basically over petitioner being

intoxicated and also over serving of stale lunch

and the quarrel was extended till 6.30 p.m. in

evening and it is stated that the

petitioner/accused being furious pressed the

neck of his wife and killed her. The said

complaint came to be registered in Crime

No.35/2020 for the offences punishable under

Section 498A and 302 of IPC. The petitioner

filed Crl.Misc.No.313/2021 seeking bail and the

same came to be rejected by V Additional
4

District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, by order

dated 16.04.2021. Therefore, the petitioner is

before this Court seeking bail.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner and the learned High Court

Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

4. It would be the contention of the learned

counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is

innocent, he has not committed any offence as

alleged and he has been falsely implicated in

this case. He contends that there are no

eyewitnesses to the incident and the case of

the prosecution is based on the circumstantial

evidence. Since the investigation is over and

charge-sheet has been filed the petitioner is

not required for any custodial interrogation.
5

As the case is based on circumstantial evidence

the prosecution has to prove the guilt of the

petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. With this,

he prayed for allowing the petition.

5. Per contra, learned High Court

Government Pleader contended that the offence

alleged against the petitioner is heinous in

nature which is punishable with death or

imprisonment for life. He contends that the

death has taken place in the house of the

petitioner. It is his further contention that

CWs.12 and 14 have seen the accused going

out of the house on the day and time of

incident. The Doctor who conducted post

mortem examination has noted ligature marks

over the neck of the deceased and it was

opinioned that cause of death is due to
6

asphyxia as a result of compression of neck.

He contends that on perusal of the entire

charge-sheet materials there is prima facie

case against the petitioner for the offence

committed. Therefore, he prayed to reject the

petition.

6. Having regard to the submission made by

the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned High Court Government Pleader, this

Court has gone through the charge-sheet

papers.

7. The accusation leveled against the

petitioner is that he used to come drunk and

quarrel with his wife Rukmavva and as on the

date of incident, as the deceased served stale

food to the petitioner, he quarreled with her
7

and pressed her neck and killed her.

Subsequently pretended as she died due to

electric shock. There are no eyewitnesses to

the incident and the prosecution case is based

on circumstantial evidence. As per the charge-

sheet papers CWs.12 and 14 are the two

persons who seen the petitioner going out of

the garage room. The other circumstances are

that, the death of the deceased who is the wife

of the petitioner has taken place in the house.

The prosecution has to prove those

circumstances along with other circumstances

beyond reasonable doubt. The petitioner is in

judicial custody since 11.04.2020 and as the

charge-sheet is filed he is not required for

custodial interrogation. There are no criminal

antecedents of the petitioner. The main

objection of the prosecution is that in the
8

event of granting bail, the petitioner is likely to

cause threat to the complainant and other

prosecution witnesses. The same may be set

right by imposing stringent conditions.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the case

and submission of the counsel, this Court is of

the view that there are valid grounds for

granting bail subject to certain terms and

conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the

following:

ORDER

The petition filed under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C., is allowed. Consequently, the

petitioner shall be released on bail in Crime

No.35/2020 of respondent Police Station

subject to the following conditions:

9

i) The petitioner shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh

Only) with one surety for the like sum
to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Court.

ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in
tampering the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The petitioner shall attend the Court
on all the dates of hearing unless
exempted and co-operate in speedy
disposal of the case.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SBS*

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

Recent Comments

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2024 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation