w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Ravikumar @ Kariya v/s State by Konanakunte Police, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru


Company & Directors' Information:- G E CO PUBLIC LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U36900WB1951PLC021802

    Criminal Petition No. 1621 of 2020

    Decided On, 19 August 2020

    At, High Court of Karnataka

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

    For the Petitioner: B. Lethif, Syed Akbar Pasha, Advocates. For the Respondent: Mahesh Shetty, HCGP.



Judgment Text


(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the Crime No.398/2018 of Konankunte P.S., Bengaluru for the offences p/u/s 143, 147, 148, 323, 307, 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC and Section 25(1)(B)(b) of ARMS ACT.)

1. The petitioner who is accused no.3 is seeking to be enlarged on bail consequent to his arrest in Crime No.398/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 307, 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 25 (1) (B) (b) of the Arms Act.

2. The case that is made out by the prosecution is that CW.1 had lodged a complaint alleging that when the complainant along with his elder brother Muruga and his friends were consuming alcohol next to the house of the complainant, someone had telephoned to Nimhans Raja, charge-sheet accused no.16 and heard him communicating on phone that the complainant, his brother and his friend were consuming alcohol together. It is further stated that when they were getting ready to go home, by that time accused nos.1, 2, charge-sheet accused no.17, charge-sheet accused no.16 and other 8 to 9 persons came in two autos and two bikes and collided with the vehicle of the complainant, due to which complainant and his brother fell down and they tried to escape and started running. At that time, accused nos.1, 2, charge-sheet accused no.16 and 17 along with 8 to 9 other persons chased the complainant's brother and assaulted him causing his death. Consequent to this incident, complaint came to be made, FIR was registered, investigation was taken up and charge-sheet has been filed. It is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.11.2018.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he has not been named in the complaint or FIR at the first instance and the main allegation as against the accused who were identified is only of accused nos.1, 2, 3, charge- sheet accused no.16 and 17. It is further submitted that the motive of pre-existing enmity is in between the deceased and accused nos.1 and 2 as made out in the 161 statement of accused no.1 recorded on 21.11.2018. It is further submitted that it is only in the further statement recorded on 30.11.2018 of the complainant that the identity of the petitioner has been established after showing the accused to CW.1 in the police station. Accordingly, it is contended that identity itself is vitiated as there are procedural lapses by revealing the identity of the accused to CW.1 prior to trial and test identification parade.

4. It is further submitted that the question of identity and the question of role of the petitioner as regards the commission of crime is a matter to be established during trial. This is more so as the petitioner has not been identified in the complaint filed or in the statement of witnesses recorded at the first instance on 23.11.2018.

5. It is contended that the case as made out in the charge-sheet as regards the petitioner and other accused of having inflicted fatal injuries is contrary to the version made out in the compliant insofar as accused no.17 was identified as having assaulted the deceased as per the complaint though in the charge- sheet, accused no.17 has been mentioned as mere conspirator. It is submitted that the case that has been made out at a subsequent point of time on the basis of further statement of the witnesses recorded on 30.11.2018 is an improvisation of the case as made out in the complaint. It is further submitted that the accused had a criminal background.

6. The learned HCGP while opposing the petition submits that compliant also mentions involvement of nine others who though not identified at the first instance, such of the other persons are identified on the basis of further statement of CW.1 and other witnesses recorded on 30.11.2018.

7. Heard both sides.

8. It is to be noticed that the petitioner is in custody since 22.11.2018. The complaint at the first instance mentions only as regards to the role of accused nos.1, 2, charge-sheet accused no.16 and 17. It is only in the further statement of CW.1 and other witnesses recorded on 30.11.2018, that identity of accused no.3 has been referred to. It is further asserted in the further statement that the accused were shown in the police station upon which identity was established which throws open many questions regarding procedural lapses by revealing the identity of accused prior to test identification and trial. It is noticed that such further statement is recorded after nine days. It is to be noticed that many injuries have been caused by acts attributed to the accused collectively and that the role of the petitioner in commission of the crime and his identity is a matter to be established during trial. There is also no reference to any test identification parade to ascertain the identity of the accused.

9. Prima-facie, there are certain contradictions in the case of prosecution insofar as the role of accused including accused no.17 though shown in the complaint as having assaulted the deceased, he has been shown as a conspirator at the subsequent stage in the charge-sheet.

10. The investigation is complete and charge- sheet has been filed. The present proceedings cannot be treated to be punitive in nature. The apprehension of tampering with the witnesses is a matter that could be taken note of by imposing appropriate conditions.

12. Accordingly, in light of discussion made above, taking note of the contentions of the petitioner, and also taking note that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.11.2018, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C., is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.398/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 307, 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 25 (1) (B) (b) of the Arms Act, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-oper

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

ate for the expeditious disposal of the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness. (iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO. (v) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his attendance before the Station House Officer, Konanakunte P.S., Bengaluru City, once a month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till conclusion of the trial. (vi) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activities of like nature. Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

06-10-2020 Gangandharan Nair Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 K.S. Muhammed Nazim & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Kochi & Others High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 K.S. Muhammed Nazim & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Kochi & Others High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 Mohammed Shariff Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
01-10-2020 Mohammed Shariff Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
01-10-2020 Mohammed Rafiq Saikalgar & Others Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
01-10-2020 Raheesh Babu Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 Raheesh Babu Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
30-09-2020 G.D. Harakumar & Others Versus The Commissioner of Police, Represented by its Special Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
30-09-2020 G.D. Harakumar & Others Versus The Commissioner of Police, Represented by its Special Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
29-09-2020 Yallappa Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented By Addl. State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad & Another High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Lloyd Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by The State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Mohammed Shoaib Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Mohammed Shoaib Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Yashwanth @ Yashavant Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Addl. State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Malathi @ Maluruthamma & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by Learned State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
29-09-2020 Malathi @ Maluruthamma & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by Learned State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
28-09-2020 T.U. Roopesh Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
25-09-2020 Mallappa & Another Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
25-09-2020 Sandeep Gururaj Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
24-09-2020 State of Kerala, Represented by The Assistant Labour Officer, Munnar, Through The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam Versus Annakutty Varghese, Proprietress, M/s. Misha Holiday Home, Munnar High Court of Kerala
24-09-2020 N. Nagesh Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
24-09-2020 Janak Bishu Karma Versus State of Goa, Through the Public Prosecutor, Panaji Goa In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
23-09-2020 Munsiffulla Khan Versus State by Dobbaspete Police Station, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
23-09-2020 Tousif Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Addl. State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad & Another High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
23-09-2020 Rajegowda @ Guruswamy & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore & Another High Court of Karnataka
22-09-2020 Prabhakar @ Uday Versus State by SHO, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
22-09-2020 Ajgar Ali @ Rohil Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
22-09-2020 Ramesh Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
22-09-2020 Jervasio Pereira Versus State Through Public Prosecutor, High Court of Bombay at Goa & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
21-09-2020 Saraswati Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
18-09-2020 Sarath Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
18-09-2020 Libin Salas Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
18-09-2020 Thankappan Pillai Versus State of Kerala, Rep. by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
17-09-2020 Rajesh & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
17-09-2020 Sasidharan Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
17-09-2020 Muhammed Shifas Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
17-09-2020 M/s. Keynote Capitals Limited, Mumbai, Represented by Its Managing Director Vineet & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
17-09-2020 Anandi Versus State, Rep. by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
16-09-2020 R. Pradeep Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by The Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
15-09-2020 P.C. Latha & Others Versus State of Kerala, Rep. by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Others High Court of Kerala
15-09-2020 P. Bharat Kumar Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by Special Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
14-09-2020 Shafeeq Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
14-09-2020 Surendran Versus State of Kerala Through Excise Inspector Aluva, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
14-09-2020 A.S. Rohith @ Jaki & Another Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by The State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
14-09-2020 Zameer Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
14-09-2020 Sapna Chouhan & Another Versus State, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
11-09-2020 Rukmuddin Kudminchi @ Rukmuddin Kunbenchi Versus State through Public Prosecutor High Court of Bombay at Panaji Goa In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
11-09-2020 B.S. Yediyurappa Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad & Another High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
11-09-2020 Vijimon Versus The State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
11-09-2020 V. Kanaga & Others Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Secretary to Government, Public (Political Pension-2) Department, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
11-09-2020 V. Kanaga & Others Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Secretary to Government, Public (Political Pension-2) Department, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
11-09-2020 Khazamainuddin @ Mainu Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
11-09-2020 Daku Naik Versus The State of Karnataka (Through Sand Ur P.S., Ballari), Represented by its State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
10-09-2020 C.G. Sagar Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
09-09-2020 Bilichodu Basavaraja @ Basavaraja Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, Ballari High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
09-09-2020 Nawaz Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
09-09-2020 KMJ Public School, Represented by Its Manager, Kanjiramattom Mosque & Another Versus C.M. Ance & Others High Court of Kerala
09-09-2020 Maresh Versus The State of Karnataka by Kolar Rural Police Station, Represented by Special Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
08-09-2020 Sangappa & Others Versus The State of Karnataka, Rept. by State Public Prosecutor, Kalaghatagi High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
08-09-2020 Thippanna & Another Versus State by Masthi Police, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore & Another High Court of Karnataka
07-09-2020 The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission Rep. by its Secretary, Chennai Versus P. Muthian High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-09-2020 Jinappa Ishwarappa Gabannavar Versus The State Through Hubballi Rural Police, by The Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
04-09-2020 Rajesh Kumar Singh Versus State Public Service Tribunal Thru.Chairman & Others High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
04-09-2020 Chandan @ ABCD Chandan Versus State of Karnataka Rajagopala Nagara Police Station, Represented by The State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
04-09-2020 Alfadul Sobhi & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
04-09-2020 Ananda Ramappa Manavaddar & Others Versus State of Karnataka by Rural Police, (Represented by Learned State Public Prosecutor) High Court of Karnataka
03-09-2020 M/s. Khushee Construction through its Power of Attorney Holder, Patna Versus The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
03-09-2020 G.K. Santhosha Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
03-09-2020 Rajiv @ Raju Gupta & Others Versus State (through) Public Prosecutor High Court of Bombay at Goa High Court Building Altinho, Panjim & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
03-09-2020 Syed Kaleem & Another Versus The State by Tilak Nagar Police Station, Represented by its State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
02-09-2020 Sarojamma & Others Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by Kallambella Police, by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
01-09-2020 K.S. Arvind Kumar Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
01-09-2020 D.T. Pallavi Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
01-09-2020 Rajappa & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
01-09-2020 M.K. Bhagyashree & Another Versus State of Karnataka (Represented by Learned Special Public Prosecutor) High Court of Karnataka
28-08-2020 State of Tamil Nadu, Represented By The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras Versus N. Vijayakumar Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
28-08-2020 State of Tamil Nadu, Represented By The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras Versus N. Vijayakumar Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
28-08-2020 Chandan @ Abcd Chandan Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by the State Public Prosecutor, Benglauru High Court of Karnataka
28-08-2020 State Represented By The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras Versus G. Pugazhenthi & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
28-08-2020 State of Tamil Nadu, Represented By The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras Versus N. Vijayakumar Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
27-08-2020 L. Madan @ Katu Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
27-08-2020 Praveena @ Itachi Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Kamakshipalya Police Station, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
27-08-2020 Pradeep Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
27-08-2020 R. Hemanth Kumar Versus State of Karnataka by Chamarajpet Police, (Represented by Learned State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
27-08-2020 Shyamu & Another Versus The State of Karnataka by Kumbalagodu Police Station, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
27-08-2020 Pradeepa Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
27-08-2020 Ganesh Poojary Versus State by Bajpe Police Station, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
26-08-2020 Manjunatha Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by the Special Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
26-08-2020 Muhammed Versus State of Kerala Rep. by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam Through S.H.O. Varapuzha Police Station, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
26-08-2020 Sujatha & Others Versus State of Karnataka Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
25-08-2020 Abdul Kabeer Versus The State of Kerala, Represented by The Station House Officer, Irikkur Police Station, Through The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
25-08-2020 Subhash @ Ansari Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Director of Public Prosecution, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
21-08-2020 Pankaj Chaudhary, HCS, Special Secretary, Public Health Engineer Department Versus Union of India, through its Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
20-08-2020 C.B. Kamalesh Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor Office, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
20-08-2020 Nagaraju Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
20-08-2020 Nagendra @ Naga Versus State by Tarikere Police, Represented by Public Prosecutor, Bangaluru High Court of Karnataka
19-08-2020 Vinay @ Vini & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by its State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
19-08-2020 Jabbar Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
19-08-2020 Harishikesh Simhadri Versus State of Karnataka by Parappana Agrahara Police Station, Represented by its State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka