DEVARAJA, D.M. VENKATEGOWDA AND SMT. GANGAMMA D.M. VENKATEGOWDA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY GONIBEEDU P.S. AND BILIGOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, who are arrayed as A.1 to A.3 in S.C. No. 66/2013 on the file of the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Chikkamagalur, registered for the offences under Sections 307, 324, 326, 302, 114 r/w. 34 of IPC and under Sections 25, 27 and 30 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959, are before this Court praying for enlarging them on bail. It is the case of the prosecution, there is Government land measuring about 1 acres 3 guntas situated adjacent land to the land of the accused at Donagoodu, Uduse village, coming within the jurisdiction of the respondent/police. It is the case of the prosecution, the villagers and Kiragunda Grama Panchayath within whose jurisdiction this property comes had decided to build a community hall in the said Government land. It is also the case of the prosecution, the accused in the case had encroached upon three guntas out of the said Government land about 10 years ago. In respect of the same, there were quarrels between the two i.e. the accused on the one hand and the villagers on the other hand. The villagers were requesting the accused to give up that three guntas of land for enabling to put up community hall in the government land. The accused had not acceded to their request.

(2.) MR . C.H. Hanumantharaya, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the material now on record discloses the accused in exercise of right of private defence of the person and property have acted, which has resulted in causing injuries to C.W. 2, 3 and the death of deceased -Jeevan. He submits, according to the prosecution, the Government land measuring 1.3 guntas situated adjacent to the land of these accused was ear marked by the panchayath for building community hall. Investigating agency has made a request to the panchayath to furnish the copy of the resolution, but the concerned panchayath, namely, Kirugunda Grama Panchayath coming within the jurisdiction of Donugodi Village, have given an endorsement/reply letter stating that there is no such resolution passed by the grama panchayath. He contended, therefore, the allegation of the prosecution that the land had been ear marked for building community hall and to that effect the resolution has been passed by the panchayath, cannot be believed. He further contend the correspondence made by the Investigating Officer reveals a galata has taken place in front of the house of the accused No. 1, that would indicate the accused in the said galata in exercise of the right of private defence of person and property have caused injuries to C.W. 2, 3 and also the death of deceased - Jeevan. If that is so it cannot be said that they have committed the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC at this stage. He further contends the spot panchanama drawn up in the case reveals glass panes of the windows of the house of the accused had been smashed. The car which had been parked near the house of the accused had been damaged on its back side, i.e., on the dickey portion and further the fire arm, namely, BBML gun club has been found broken at the said place. That wound indicate villagers must have attacked the accused and in retaliation to it the accused have resorted to assault the villages, in which C.W. 2 and 3 have sustained injuries and the deceased has been shot dead. Therefore, that would further fortify the case of the accused that in exercise of right of private defence of person and property they have committed this offence. Therefore, by any stretch of imagination it cannot be said that the accused have, in the circumstances, have committed the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.

(3.) IN so far as accused No. 1 and 2 are concerned, he submits all the accused are entitled to be released on bail having regard to the facts of the case, in view of they having acted in exercise of their private defence of person and property. He also submitted that the accused are in custody since 11.02.2013. Final report has been filed and case is now pending before Sessions Court, under these circumstances, the accused be released on bail.