IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE l 5 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY CRIMINAL PETITON No.10056/2011 BETWEEN: Hanmant, S/o. Pandurang Bhajantri, Age: 30 years, 0cc: Driver, Rio. K.E.B. Colony, Jarnkhandi, Dist. Bagalkot. . . . Petitioner (By Shri. Prabhakar A. Kulkarni, Advocate) AND: State by Jamkhandi Rural Police Station, Represented by S.P.P., Dharwad. . . . Respondent (By Shri. Anand Kumar Navalgimath, Government Pleader) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to the This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, 2. It is stated that the petitioner along with another were accused of having committed offences punishable under Sections 302 and 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant namely, Sub-Inspector, Crime Branch, Jamkhandi, had stated that, he was patrolling Jamkhandi town in his jeep. At about 11:30 p.m. on 10.11.2010, he had stopped at Millan Dhaba and the owner of the Dhaba had informed the complainant that there was a Tata Indica Car parked near “Agase Bagilu”, main entrance and that there were two persons in the car, along with a woman, who was lying in the rear seat of the car and that the woman appeared to be partially undressed. The complainant thereafter, took the owner of the Dhaba along with him and he found the car with two persons inside and a woman lying on the rear seat and she was aged about 40. The complainant enquired with the two persons inside the car as to who they were. They disclosed their identity. But were not able to explain about the woman lying in the back seat, On further inspection the complainant found that the woman was dead and she was one Alaka, wife of Manohar Raut of Jamkhandi and both the persons who were in the car, smelled of alcohol. On suspicion that the two were involved in cause of death of the woman had arrested them and produced them before the Station I-lead Officer, Jamkhandi Rural Police Station. On the basis of the said complaint, a First Information Report was lodged with the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jamkhandi, and the accused were remanded to judicial custody. The accused thereafter, moved the District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot for enlargement on bail, the same has been rejected. It is in that background that the petitioners are before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Police have found the woman lying in the rear seat of the car. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the woman — Alaka, had willfully accompanied the petitioners and consumed alcohol with them and she also had sex with them. It is thereafter, she had died a natural death. g 4 There was no indication of foul play, as there was no injury found on the body of the woman. She had unfortunately died and they have been suspected of murder, where as there is no indication of any violence on her person. The medical report also did not indicate any such foul play. 4. In that background, the learned counsel would submit that merely because the woman was found dead in the car, the petitioner could not held guilty for rape and murder, in the absence of medical evidence, in this regard or any eye witnesses in respect of the same and therefore seeks enlargement on bail. 5. The learned Government Pleader on the other hand, would submit that though the medical report did not disclose any injuries or other marks of violence on the body of the woman. The fact that she was found in the company of the petitioner in the night and when she was partially undressed in the back seat ofthe car would indicate that the petitioners were involved in causing her death. The absence of any physical g I 5 marks, or physical violence by itself is not conclusive of the fact that petitioners have not caused her death. Further, the Forensic Science Laboratory report was awaited and therefore, it is in that background that the lower Court has thought it fit to reject the bail application. There is no ground made out for reconsideration of the opinion formed by the Court below and that the petitioners sought to be kept in custody would not hamper investigation. 6. In the above facts and circumstances since there is no material to indicate that the woman was missing from home and that these petitioners were responsible in having abducted her. The absence of any injuries on the body of the woman would indicate that she was a willing participant with the petitioner in having joined their company. The fact that she was dead and the cause ofdeath not having been established even as on date, though the incident is of 10.11.2010, is not for any • •• .. rensicSdeLabooreport having been delayed for three months is also not explained. .5 6 7. In that view of the matter, the petitioner has made out a case for enlargement on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions: 1) He shall furnish a personal bond for a sum of2O,OOO/-, with a solvent surety for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 2) He shall make himself available to the Investigation Officer as and when required for the purposes of investigation. 3) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without seeking leave of that Court. 4) He shall not seek to induce or threaten the prosecution witnesses. 5) He shall attend the trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail subject to the Court granting exemption for good and valid reason. Rsh JUDGE