SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Yerriswami @ Pulusa vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 July, 2018

CRL.P.No.3322/2018

:1:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3322/2018

BETWEEN:

YERRISWAMI @ PULUSA S/O. NAGARAJ B,
AGE 26 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O. 1ST WARD, CHORNOOR VILLAGE,
SANDUR TQ 583101,
BALLARI DIST (ACCUSED NO.2)

… PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ANWAR BASHA B, ADV.)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
(THROUGH KUDLIGI P.S.)
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH AT BENGALURU.
… RESPONDENT
(SRI. RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C BY
THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS
HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.110/2017 OF KUDLIGI POLICE
STATION, BALLARI DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 302, 201 R/W. 34 OF IPC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.P.No.3322/2018

:2:

ORDER

The petitioner has filed the present petition under

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth

for brevity referred to as ‘Cr.P.C’) praying to enlarge him

on bail in Crime No.110/2017 of Kudligi Police Station,

Ballari District for the offence punishable under Sections

498(A), 302, 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code

(henceforth for brevity referred to as ‘IPC’).

2. The summary of the case of the prosecution is

that, the complainant Sri. Kubera, who is said to be the

Forest Guard, lodged a complaint with the respondent-

police alleging that on 21.05.2017 in the morning at about

8.00 a.m., while he was on the patrolling duty, he found

dead body of a woman in semi-burnt condition near Adavi

Anjaneya Temple in the said forest area. From the scene

he could notice that it was a case of murder and

somebody had murdered the said lady and had put her

dead body there and attempted to burn it. It is further

stated that during the investigation, it was revealed to the
CRL.P.No.3322/2018

:3:

Investigating Officer that the deceased was one Smt.

Vijayalaxmi @ Reshma, the wife of accused No.1. When

based on the suspicion, the husband of the deceased i.e.

accused No.1 was interrogated by the Investigating Officer,

the entire details of the incident came to the light.

According to prosecution, the marriage of the deceased

with accused No.1 was a love marriage and after marriage,

the husband/accused No.1 was suspecting the character

and fidelity of the deceased. It is in this connection, joined

by accused No.2 and 3, the accused caused the murder of

deceased Vijayalaxmi and in order to destroy the evidence,

tried to burn the dead body in the forest area.

3. The learned HCGP, in his statement of

objections filed on behalf of the respondent has brought to

the notice of the Court that the same petitioner who is

accused No.2 in the alleged crime had earlier filed a

similar petition before this Court in Criminal Petition

No.100067/2018, which came to be rejected by the order

of this Court dated 25.01.2018.

CRL.P.No.3322/2018

:4:

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner except

submitting that the accused is an innocent and has been

falsely implicated in the matter was unable to mention any

change in the circumstances subsequent to the dismissal

of his similar petition in Criminal Petition

No.100067/2018. In view of the fact that an earlier

attempt by the same accused was rejected by this Court

and as on date there is no change in the circumstance and

also in the light that the alleged offence is heinous in

nature and the Investigating Officer claims to have

collected several incriminating materials against the

accused, I am of the view that the present petition does

not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the petition is

rejected.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Svh/Yan

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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