M. MAHESHA, S/O. KURIMADAIAH, CHANDRASHEKARA, S/O. M. CHIKKAMADAIAH AND MAHADEVA, S/O. SHIVAMAHADEVA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH KOLLEGAL RURAL POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners have sought for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest for the offence punishable under Sections 304 and 201 read with Section 149 IPC and Sections 135 and 1389 of the Karnataka Electricity Act.

(2.) THE facts reveal that the first accused who is the owner of the land had fenced his land with zinc wire to which he had taken unauthorised electricity supply and on the date of the incident i.e., on 12 -01 -2011 at about 7.00 a.m. in the morning the deceased Mahadeva had to go to the house of Accused No. 1 for some work and while he was crossing the fence, it appears that due to electrocution sustained shock and died on the spot. His family members searched for him and on the next day in the morning, they came to know that the dead body had fallen near the land of Accused No. 1. There were burn injuries due to electric shock and in the circumstances, the wife of the deceased submitted a complaint to the Police that the accused persons have unauthorisedly taken the electricity supply to the zinc wire fencing to their land and that the deceased having come in contact with electric wire has sustained electric shock and died due to electrocution at the spot. It is in these circumstances that a complaint was filed and registered against the Petitioners. The Petitioners submit that they are innocent and have not committed any offence and further that Accused No. 1 has been released on bail and therefore have sought for anticipatory bail.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , the first accused who is the owner of the land has been granted bail by the Sessions Court. So far as the Petitioners are concerned, they are relatives of Accused No. 1 and as to actually who connected the electricity supply unauthorisedly to the fence is a matter which will have to be considered during the course of the trial and not at this stage. So taking into consideration the nature of the offence, the punishment provided and the fact that Accused No. 1 has been granted bail, I am of the opinion that the Petitioners are also entitled to the bail sought for. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: