IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13 DAY OF JULY, 2011 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK B. HINCHIGERI CRIMINAL PETITION No.10812/2011 BETWEEN: SMT. KALLAMA @ KALLESHWARI @ KALA W/O Y.R.RAJESH, AGE 30 YEARS, 0CC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O H.No.775, OLD TOWN, OPPOSITE RAILWAY STATION, YALAHANKA, BANGALORE. PETITIONER (BY SRI F.V.PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HON’BLE HIGH COURT, CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD. THROUGH SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION, HUBLI. RESPONDENT (BY SRI P.H,GOTKHINDI, GOVT ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON REGULAR BAIL IN SUB-URBAN P.S. HUBLI, CRIME NO.83/2011 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 120-B, 108 AND 115 R/W 34 OF IPC. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The respondent registered Crime No.83/2011 against 3 accused persons including the petitioner (accused No.1) for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 108, 115 nw 34 IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief Is that the petitioner hatched a conspiracy to have her mother-in-law and 6 other persons murdered by engaging the supari killers. The motive attributed to the petitioner is that she wanted to knock off the property of her mother-In-law, as the latter had refused to gIve the former’s husband’s share in the property. 3. Sri F.V.Patll, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence. He submits that the police have conducted some kind of mock operation to implicate the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has not paid any supari to any killers. He submits that t as the petitioner is a woman and has a girl child of 4½ years and as the mother and the child are in the judicial custody from a ii--. - 4 V. 3 7.6.2011, they be released on such conditions as this Court deems fit. 4. Sri Gotkhindi, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, confirms on Instructions, that the girl child of 4½ years is with the mother, who is in judicial custody and that she is being looked after well by the concerned authorities. He further brings to my notice that there is no averment in the memorandum of the petition that the child is not being looked after well by the concerned authorities. As prima facie there are enough materlato show that the petitioner tried to have eliminated as many as 7 persons, she is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. The petitioner is a tender aged woman of 30 years. She has a girl child of 4½ years. The petitioner has lost her husband Sri Rajesh 4 years ago. As there was nobody to look after the girl child of 4½ years, the said child is with the mother in the judicial custody. It is time for the child to be enrolled into the school. The materials collected so far are indicative of the petitioner having the mind to act vindictively to eliminate her mother-in-law and others. But they are not indicative of the petitioner giving effect to her evil thoughts. That the police sent 2 persons in disguise as supari killers may have only firmed up her alleged evil desire. 6. The respondent has till now recovered 65,OOO/-. It is hard to believe that she could have eliminated 7 people by hiring the supari killers with her 65,OOO/-. The police have recovered 2 rings from the petitioners. The recovered materials may not be relatable to the alleged conspiracy. Further, it is also stated that 4 mobile phones are recovered. Unless the call sheet information in the matter of incoming and outgoing calls from the four mobile numbers are collected, the recovery of four mobiles also may not lead the prosecution anywhere. 7. Considering all these aspects of the matter, this Court deems it just to grant the relief of bail to the petitioner on the following stringent terms: I) The petitioner shall furnish a bond for a sum of 5O,OOO/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) with 2 solvent c sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. ii) She shall not intimidate or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. iii) She shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer and she shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called. iv) She shall mark her attendance between 12.00 noon and 2.00 p.m. on every Sunday before the Station House Officer of Mahila Police Station, Hubli. v) She shall not go anywhere near the house of her mother-in-law till the trial is completed. 8. Bail is granted conditionally. sal iuDGE bvr