iN THE HIGH COURT OF IKARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 2T H DAY OF JULY 201 1 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE BA/,PINTO CRlINALPETITION No. i76j2Oll C W CRIMINAL PETITION No 17j2011 Between: I . Siddapura Siddappa. S/ 0. Marenna. Age: 24 years. Occ:Ae riculturist curn Tractor Driver. R/o. Basavanna Camp, Sinciuvala Village, Bellarv TaIuI< and District. 2. Gavisiddapura Tb ippaiah. S/o. Rudrappa, Age: 21 years, R/o, Basavanna Camp. Sincluvala Village, Bellarv Taluk and District. . . Petitioners (By Shri 2. Basavaraj, Advocate) And: The State of Earnataka, (Through Moka P.S.) Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor. High (‘ourt of karnataka. Circuit Bench. Dharwad. . Respondent (By Shri Vinavak S. Kulkarni, H.C.G.P,) / -2- This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail on any reasonable conditions as deemed fit by this Honbie Court in Crime No.24/2011 registered in Moka Police Station. Bellarv Taluk and District for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code pending investigation and trial of the case. In Crl.P.No.l0737/201 1 Between: 1. Bellaum Siddappa. S/o. Parasappa. Age: 68 years. 0cc: Agriculture. R/o. Basavanna Camp, Sinduvala Village. Bellarv Taluk and District. 2. Gavisiddapura Rudrappa @ Driver Rudrappa, S/o. Parasappa, Age: 50 years, 0cc: Agriculture, R/o. Basavanna Camp, Sinduvala Village, Bellary Taluk and District. .. .Petitioners (By Shri C.H.Jadhav and Shri P.K.Uppar, Advocates) And: The State of Karnataka, By Moka P.S. (Bellary) Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench, Dhanvad. . . . Respondent (By Shri Vinayak S. Kulkarni. H.C.G.P.) ‘I -3- This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail in connection with Moka Police Station Crime No.24/2011, which is registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. These criminal petitions coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: - ORDER Heard Shri J.Basavaraj, Shri C.H.Jadhav and Shri P.K.Uppar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri Vinayak S. Kulkarni, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent — State. 2. These two petitions are filed seeking bail in Crime No.24/2011 of Moka Police Station, registered on 06.04.2011 for a man missing, which was later on registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The complainant one K. Pothaiah has filed a man missing compliant before the Moka Police Station 4 on 06.01.201 1 stating that his qn by name Lingappa aged about 25 ears, is married about S to 6 ‘ears prior to the ghing complaint to one (langamma. He is ha’ ing one male child and one femalc child and they arc hiing together. On 12.03.2011 at about 05:00 p m.. the said Lingappa had gone to the shop to bring medicine to his wife, tho was not uell, but he has not returned. It is stated in the complaint that his son was fond of field drama and therefore. he might hate gone to atch the field drama. Hoe er. on the next day also his son has not returned. Thereafter. he has searched for his son in anous places in l3ellary and Hospet. but till the filing ot the complaint, his son has not returned. Hence on 06.04.2011, he has filed a man missing complaint. hich is registered as Crime No.24 1 2011 by the Police. 4. The Police have recorded further statement of Pothaiah. ho has informed the Police that his son was found consuming alcohol with one Handihal Kumarappa. The said Handihal Kumarappa has informed Pothaiah that on 12.03.2011 at about 07:30 -5- p.m., in the village Lingappa and Kumarappa had gone for consuming brandy. It is further stated by Kumarappa that during the said meeting, the petitioner herein have assaulted the said Lingappa and ultimately Lingappa had died. It is mentioned in the statement of Kumarappa that since Lingappa along with Gadilingappa. had attempted to outrage the modesty of the wife of accused No.1, all accused Nos. 1 to 4 had committed the murder of Lingappa and thereafter they lifted the dead body of Lingappa and put him in the canal. On the basis of the said statement of Handihal Kumarappa and further statement of K.Pothaiah. the Police have added Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal code to the earlier First Information Report. 5. The learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the investigation is still in progress and so far the dead body is not recovered. It is seen that Handihal Kumarappa was knowing the identity of the deceased Lingappa. However, till 27.04.2011, he has not disclosed the death of Lingappa to anybody. though the d. 6 incident has happened on 12.03.201 1. Without expressing ans opinion regarding the merits of the case. I am of the opinion that I he petitioners are entitled for bail. Accordingl3 the petitions are allocd. h. The petitioners arc directed to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25.000/ each ith one suren each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. 7. The petitioners shall not induce or threaten the prosecution vdtnesses and if it is found that the dre indulging in tampering witnesses, the Court below ;s at liberty to cancel the bail without an3 reference to this Court. The petitions are allowed. Sd/. JUDGE Rsh