LAWS(KAR)-2018-6-126

BASAVARAJ @ RAJA @ CHARI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On June 06, 2018
Basavaraj @ Raja @ Chari Appellant
V/S
The State Of Karnataka Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant-police have filed a charge sheet against the present petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged in the charge sheet that, on 30.10.2017, in the midnight, the present petitioner/accused, who earlier in the day had a quarrel with deceased Saradar, had stabbed said Saradar on different parts of his body due to which assault and injuries, Saradar succumbed to the injuries on 10.11.2017.

(2.) The present petitioner in his petition as well as the learned counsel for the petitioner in his arguments submitted that, even if it is believed that, earlier on the day on 30.10.2017, the deceased had a quarrel with the present petitioner/accused, still by that itself it cannot be inferred that the petitioner himself has committed the alleged act of assault, which is said to have resulted in the death of the assaulted/deceased. He further submitted that, the alleged statements said to have been made by C.W.1, C.W.2, C.W.3 and C.W.5 to the effect that the injured had stated before them that it was the petitioner/accused who caused him injuries, also cannot be believed for the reason that there is no material to show that the injured was in a position to speak at any point of time after the alleged incident. Stating that the case of the prosecution is filled with the doubts and submitting that the accused has been in judicial custody for a long time and that he has got his commitment towards his family, the learned counsel prays for allowing the petition as prayed for.

(3.) Learned High Court Government Pleader, who has submitted his objections and oral arguments, vehemently opposed the petition stating that the Investigating Officer has collected sufficient material to show that it was only the petitioner herein, who was seen last in the company the deceased and that C.W.1 has witnessed the quarrel that has taken place between the accused and the deceased just few hours prior to the alleged incident of stabbing. He further submitted that, apart from C.W.1 and C.W.5, who are members of the family of the deceased and other two witnesses, C.W.2 and C.W.3, also have stated about the assault and oral dying declaration made by the injured before them. All of them raise finger against the present accused only and none other. Further, the details of the injuries given by these witnesses corresponds with the injuries observed by the doctor who conducted autopsy. Stating that the materials available are sufficient to make out a prime facie case against the accused at this stage and further apprehending that the accused may flee from justice in case of his enlargement on bail, the prosecution opposes the bail.