1

IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE

Crl. Misc. Pet. No. /2012
In Crime No.694/2012

BETWEEN:

Sri. Shantha @ G. Shantha Kumar ...Petitioner

AND:
STATE by Peenya Police
Bangalore City ...Respondent

INDEX

Sl.No. Description Pages C.F.Paid

1. Memorandum of petition u/s 439
Cr.PC
2. Annexure-1
3. Vakalath/ Memo of appearance
4. Process memo

Bangalore
Date: 21/11/2012 Advocate for the Petitioner
 2

IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE

Crl. Misc. Pet. No. /2012
In Crime No.694/2012

BETWEEN:

Sri. Shantha @ G. Shantha Kumar

S/o, Gurumurthy, 20 years
Uddaramanahalli cross,
Nadur post, Sira Taluk
TumkurDistrict ...Petitioner

AND:
STATE by Peenya Police
Bangalore City ...Respondent

MEMORANDUM OF PETITION U/S 439 OF THE CODE OF CRIMNAL PROCEDURE

The Petitioner/Accused 2 humbly submits as follows: -

1. For the purpose of issue of notice, summons etc., from this Hon'ble Court,
the address of the Petitioner is as mentioned in the above cause title and the
Petitioner is represented by his counsel Dr. R. Ramachandran, Advocate, No. 7,
2nd Floor, B.R. Ramu Building Burugal Matt Road, ( Diagonal Road), V. V. Puram,
Bangalore- 560004.

THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

2. It is a case of the Respondent Police that on 29/10/2012 a person by name

G.M.Nagaraj of Bagalagunte, Bangalore, has lodged a oral complaint (the same
was recorded by the Police) to the effect that the complainant is a driver of Qualis
vehicle and since 3 months he has been residing with Smt.Padma/the deceased at
Mallikarjunappa Building, Bagalagunte Cross, Nagasandra Post, Bangalore-73. He
 3

married one Smt. Puttamma 10 years ago, who is none other than the daughter of
his sister. He has 7 years son born to his wife Smt. Puttamma who is residing with
his son at Gollahalli village, Sira Taluk, Tumkur District.
The complainant has further stated in his complaint that 5 years back when
he was living with his family at Sira Town, he came into contact with Smt. Padma
/the deceased who was the wife of one Sri Hanumantharaya, a neighbour. Later
the complainant developed illicit relationship with the deceased Smt. Padma and
started living together for the last 4 years. The deceased Smt. Padma has two
sons who are with their father Hanumantharaya.
While the complainant and the deceased Smt. Padma were living at
Bangalore, A1, brother of the complainant’s first wife Smt. Puttamma and A2
Shantha, the complainant’s brother’s son had come to the residence of
complainant at Bangalore in the absence of the complainant and threatened the
deceased Smt. Padma that she should sever her relationship with the complainant
and she has ruined the family of the complainant, his first wife and children and
they have become orphans at the village. If the deceased Smt. Padma did not
separate herself from the complainant they would show her end.
The complainant has further stated in his complaint that on 29/10/2012 at
about 4.15 p.m., when the complainant was going to his residence he saw an
auto-rickshaw bearing No. KA.02-B-2381 passing very fast in front of his house.
He saw A1, A2 & another unknown person in that auto-rickshaw. The complainant
saw his neighbour Sri Siddagangaiah and his wife shifting the deceased Smt.
Padma into an auto and the deceased Smt. Padma neck was slit and blood was
oozing out from the stomach and chin. The deceased Smt. Padma has told the
complainant that A1, A2& another person had stabbed with knives in her neck
 4

and stomach and the accused have told in anger that the deceased Smt. Padma
did not listen to their warnings to sever her relationship with the complainant.
The complainant has shifted the deceased Smt. Padma to Sapthagiri Hospital.
On receipt of oral complaint, the Respondent Police have reduced the same
in to writing and registered a case in Crime No.694/12 u/s 324, 307 R/W 34 IPC
against the A1, A2 & another. The deceased Smt Padma succumbed to the injuries
on 30/10/2012 and the Respondent Police altered the section of law for the
offence of murder u/s 302 IPC. The accused A1 to A3 were arrested by the
Respondent Police on 30/10/2012 and were produced before the Jurisdictional
Magistrate on 31/10/2012 and were remanded to judicial custody and in judicial
custody.
A certified copy of FIR is produced herewith for kind perusal of this Hon'ble
Court as Annexure-1.
GROUNDS
3. The Petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him.
4. It is reasonably difficult to believe the veracity of the averment in the FIR
that much earlier to the incident i.e., 29/10/2012 the petitioner and other
accused had visited the house of the deceased Smt. Padma and threatened her
with life if she does severe her relationship with the complainant. Then why they
did not lodge compliant with the Police to that effect is material question. It
shows that the Respondent Police in connivance with the complainant has
deliberately interpolated such averment in the FIR to strengthen the motive for
the crime alleged against the Petitioner.
5. It can be seen from the records that the Respondent Police have seized
only one knife on the voluntary statement of the A1 and not from the petitioner,
 5

whereas in the complaint it is stated that all the accused A1 to A3 have stabbed
the deceased Smt. Padma with knives.
6. It is imprudent believe that the circumstances such as when the
complainant was going to his house he noticed the accused A1, PetitionerA2 and
A3 in an auto-rickshaw on 29/10/2012 at 4.15.p.m. and later he saw the deceased
Smt. Padma being shifted into an auto by Sri Siddagangaiah and his wife. Ex Facie
it appears that in order to create chain of circumstances to implicate the
petitioner, the Respondent police have deliberately introduced such false and
fictitious statement in the FIR.
7. It is reasonably difficult to believe that the Petitioner has taken such an
extreme step to eliminate the deceased Smt. Padma who was living as wife with
the complainant as wife and husband and the complainant is none other than
the husband of the Petitioner’s sister.
8. It appears from the doctor’s medical report that when the deceased Smt.
Padma was shifted to the hospital she was unconscious. Whereas as per the
complaint the deceased Smt. Padma said to have stated that it was A1/ Petitioner
to A3 who assaulted and injured her with knives etc.
9. It is only one side of the story of the Respondent Police that the Petitioner
along with two other associates committed the culpable crime of murder. The
true story will be known only after the petitioner is enlarged on bail and the
whole investigation is completed and final report is filed.
10. The Petitioner is an auto driver at Bangalore and is married and has a family
to be looked after.
11. The Petitioner is very young and if he is allowed to languish in jail for long
his and his family life will totally be ruined.
 6

12. The Petitioner is permanent residence of Santepet of Tumkur District and is

solvent and ready to furnish surety as per this Hon'ble Court’s satisfaction if he is
enlarged on bail.
13. The petitioner is not required for the investigation as he is in judicial
custody for the last 20 days.
14. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents.
15. The Petitioner will not tamper with prosecution evidence and investigation
of the Respondent Police. He will co-operate with the Respondent Police in
investigation of the above case.
16. The Petitioner will not free from justice and jump conditions of bail.
17. The petitioner will abide all the conditions to be imposed by this Hon’ble
Court while granting bail.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner/Accused1 prays humbly this Hon'ble Court to
enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 694/12 u/s 302, r/w 34 IPC registered
by the Respondent police in the interest of justice and equity.

Place: Bangalore Advocate for the Petitioner

Date: 21/11/2012