LAWS(KAR)-2012-9-382

RAMANNA @ RAMESH S/O. BASAVANNEPPA HUTAGI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH DHARWAD THROUGH HUBLI RURAL POLICE

Decided On September 10, 2012
Ramanna @ Ramesh S/O. Basavanneppa Hutagi Appellant
V/S
State Of Karnataka By State Public Prosecutor High Court Of Karnataka Circuit Bench Dharwad Through Hubli Rural Police Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED No. 4 who is in judicial custody facing charge for offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 201, 109 read with Section 149 of the I.P.C. and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act along with 17 others, seeks bail. Heard both sides.

(2.) THE prosecution case reveals: On 21.01.2012, one Manjunath Fakeerappa Mallappanavar of Karadikoppa, Hubli Taluk, lodged a report at S.H.O, Rural Police Station, Hubli, reporting that, his uncle Shivappa, who was a member and Chairman of the Gram 'Panchayat, had contested the recent Zilla Panchayat Election. He had allegiance to the Congress Party, consequent to which BJP party workers were opposed to him. Thus, there was enmity in the group of persons of that party.

(3.) IN the report, he did not mention any offenders' name, but mentioned about the incident, which occurred few days ago. In the said incident, a few persons namely, Ramappa Huttagi, Basavaraj Amavashi, Malleshappa Siddlingannavar, Fakirappa K. Kudadhareppanavar, Lakshman Hubli, Kashimsab Ganjigatti had visited the house of Harshachandragouda. They were seen by Gurusiddappa Siddalingannavar and Manjunath Hiremath. On their information, the complainant suspected their involvement in the crime in question. On the basis of that clue, the 1st accused - Laxman was arrested and on interrogation, he gave voluntary statement, revealing political rivalry between accused No. 10 - Rohit and the victim Shivappa He revealed that a plan was hatched to kill him and in furtherance of that: conspiracy, he has fired at Shivappa. That became the basis for further investigation and the investigating officer has roped in actually 21 persons as offenders. One amongst them is the petitioner herein.