MALLAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.27/2018 of Bevoor Police Station, wherein it is seeking regular bail. Subsequent to registration of the crime against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC, the Investigating Officer has taken up the case for investigation, investigated the case by recording the statement of the witnesses and so also conducted mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses including the inquest proceedings held over the dead body on the person of the deceased Parawwa @ Parvathi, who is none other than the wife of the accused. The case in S.C.No.46/2018 is pending for trial against this accused as well as co-accused Nos.2 and 3. The co-accused have also participated with this accused to carry the dead body and the same was thrown into the land of Kempahalli Seema, as where the dead body was found and thereafter proceeded with the case for investigation, which is find place in the record.

(2.) However, this petition is a successive bail petition which is filed by the petitioner. The earlier bail petition filed by him came to be dismissed on merits of the cases relating to the statement of CW13 as where the accused was given confessional statement before him to the death of his wife-Parawwa @ Parvathi. However, this petition has been filed by the accused without any special reason or specific reasons or any changed circumstances; unless the changed circumstances, it cannot be entertain the successive bail petition filed by the petitioner-accused. Even though, the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in AIR 1978 SC 527 in the case of Babu Singh and others v. The State of Uttar Pradesh, wherein it is held that there is no bar to file successive bail petition. Therefore, the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be considered, as there are no special circumstances and so also there is no substances in the case to entertain this successive bail petition filed by the petitioner-accused.

(3.) Whereas, learned HCGP for the respondent-State who has taken me through the statement of CW13, where the accused had given confessional statement. The accused said to be assaulted the deceased with club and caused injuries on her person, which is reflected in the post-mortem report. The Doctor who has opined that the death is due to head injury, which cannot be ruled out. Subsequent to completion of the investigation by the Investigating Officer, charge sheet has been laid against the accused before the concerned Court. Now the accused is requires to be facing of a trial for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 302 201 read with Section 34 of IPC in S.C.No.46/2018. These are all the contentions taken by the learned HCGP for the respondent-State and seeking for dismissal of the bail petition filed by the petitioner, as there are no merit in this petition.