IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

CRL.P. NO. /2021

BETWEEN:

Tejas @ Kariya ...PETITIONER

AND

Hosakote P.S ....RESPONDENT

INDEX

Sl. No. Subject Page

No.

1. List of Dates and Synopsis

2. Memorandum of Criminal Petition Under section

439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

3. ANNEXURE-A Certified Copy of the FIR no

240/2019 dated 08/07/2019 on the file of the

Respondent Police pending before the Hon’ble

 VIIIth Additional District & Sessions Judge,

Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru

4. Annexure-B: Certified Copy of the chargesheet

in SC No 369/2019 dated 17/09/2019 on the file

of the Respondent Police pending before the

Hon’ble VIth Additional District & Sessions Judge,

Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru

5. Annexure-C: True Copy of the Aadhar card of

the Petitioner

6. Memo of Appearance

Place: Bangalore

Date: Advocate for Petitioner

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

CRL.P. NO. / 2021

(MEMORANDUM OF CRIMINAL PETITION UNDER SECTION

439 OF THE CrPC)

IN THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND

SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT

S.C.No. 369/2019

BETWEEN: Rank of Parties

Tejas @ Kariya Trial Court / High Court

Aged about 22 years

S/o Chandrashekar,

R/o No. 244, Ramamandira Road,

Chikkatigalarapete, Hosokote Town,

Thirumenahalli, Bangalore - 560003 ….ACCUSED no. 1 / PETITIONER

AND

State by Hosakote Police Station

Represented by
Special Public Prosecutor

High Court Compound

Bangalore- 560001 ... COMPLAINANT / RESPONDENT

MEMORANDUM OF CRIMINAL PETITION UNDER SECTION 439 OF

THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973

The Advocate for the above-named Petitioner/Accused no.1 submits as

follows:

1. That the address of the petitioner for service of court notice,

process etc., is correctly furnished in the cause title above. The

petitioner may also be served through his counsels

___________________ having office at 122/4, next to Balaji Art

Gallery, Infantry Road, Bangalore-560001.

2. That the address for the Respondent is as shown in the cause-title.

3. The Petitioner is arrayed as Accused no. 1 in Crime No.240/2019

dated 08/07/2019 of Hosakote Police Station, Bangalore, for the

offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860. The respondent Police have completed their

investigation and have filed chargesheet for the offences

 punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 as SC no. 369/2019 on 17/09/2019 pending before the

Hon’ble VIII Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District,

at Bangalore. The certified copy of the FIR bearing no. 0133/2020

on the file of the H.A.L Police Station is placed herewith as

Annexure A. The certified copy of the chargesheet bearing SC no.

369/2019 pending before the Hon’ble VIII Addl. Dist. & Sessions

Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, at Bangalore is produced herewith

as Annexure B.

4. The Petitioner is peaceful law – abiding citizen.

5. That the Petitioner was arrested by the Respondent police officials

and on the same day was produced before the Learned Additional

Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoskote on 08/07/2019, who then remanded

the Petitioner to judicial custody and he presently continues to be

in judicial custody.

6. The Petitioner is filing this petition seeking for enlargement on bail

on the following facts and grounds, amongst others.

FACTS OF THE CASE

7. It is the case of the Prosecution that the Petitioner/Accused no. 1

 was in love with one Kumari Meena CW 6, but she rejected him and

was one love with the deceased one Pavan Kumar. The said

rapport between CW 6 and the deceased, made Accused no.

1/Petitioner develop grudge against the deceased. It is alleged

that accused persons met the deceased on 06/07/2019 and took

him to Dodda Amanikere near Gangamma temple, Hoskote,

assaulted him with beer bottle and stabbed him with knife.

8. The Respondent Police registered an FIR Crime no. 240/2019 dated

07/07/2019 against the Petitioner/Accused no. 1 and Accused no. 2

one Rajesh @ Mukunda for the offences punishable under section

302 and 201 of IPC on the basis of first information given by one

Manjunath CW 1 PW 1. The Respondent Police have filed

chargesheet against the Accused no. 1/Petitioner and Accused no.

2 for the offences punishable under section 302 and 201 of the

IPC. The Ld. Magistrate registered CC no. 2356/2019 against the

Accused and since the matter is triable by the Sessions Court, the

Ld. Magistrate committed the matter to the Sessions Court as per

order dated 25/11/2019 and the same came to registered before

the Ld. Sessions Judge as SC 369/2019.

9. That the Accused no. 2 has been granted and released on bail as
 per the orders of the Ld. Sessions Judge in Crl Misc no. 1191/2019.

GROUNDS

10. It is submitted that the Petitioner is innocent and has nothing

to do with the alleged case, and this case has been filed with the

sole purpose of harassing the Petitioner.

11. It is most respectfully submitted that the Petitioner has

nothing to do with any such incident as alleged and further looking

at the material placed on record, and there is no cognizable offence

made out against him.

12. It is most respectfully submitted that the allegations stated in

the Complaint are completely false imaginary, and nothing is true

and nowhere has it implicated the Petitioner in this case.

13. It is submitted that looking at the Complaint filed by the

Respondent Police will not disclose any offence against the

Petitioner as alleged in the Complaint. The ingredients of the

offences alleged are not made out against the Petitioner. The

Complaint is clearly filed only for the purpose of harassing the

Petitioner. The Petitioner is merely aged about 22 years and has a

bright future before him.

14. That the Complainant, purely with the motive, has filed this

case against the Petitioner. It is submitted that the case has been

filed with a motive to harass and intimidate this Petitioner and his

family who has nothing to do with any of these allegations.

15. It is submitted that the there is no clear indication of any

evidence to show directly or indirectly that the Petitioner has been

involved in the alleged offence.

16. It is submitted that the entire case of the prosecution against

the Petitioner herein is based on circumstantial evidence, and there

is no eye witness to show the allegations levelled against him.

17. It is submitted that the entire chargesheet and FIR suffers

with several loopholes in the statements of the witnesses and the

investigation, which goes on to show the innocence of the

Petitioner.

18. It is submitted that the deceased Pawan Kumar was missing

from the date of 06/07/2019, however the family members fail to

act immediately in approaching the jurisdictional police station and

filing a missing compliant or make any kind of attempt to find the

missing deceased. It is further submitted that admittedly, none of

the witnesses even make a phone call to the deceased to know his
 whereabouts.

19. It is submitted that there is no eye witness to the case and

the entire case of prosecution rests on the circumstantial evidence.

20. It is submitted that circumstantial evidence, that it is settled

law that in circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is

drawn should be fully proved and such circumstances must be

conclusive in nature. Moreover, all the circumstances should be

complete and there should be no gap left in the chain of evidence.

21. That the entire case of the prosecution rests on the theory of

motive and last seen. However, there is nothing substantial

forthcoming from the statements of the witnesses to prove either

of these theories.

22. It is the case of the prosecution that the Petitioner was in

love with PW4/CW 6 Kumari Meena and however she refused him,

as she was in love relationship with the deceased. Therefore it is

alleged that the Petitioner developed grudge against the deceased

and committed the offence of murder.

23. However during the course of the chief and cross examination

of the said witness PW4/CW6, she has denied the case of the
 prosecution and has turned hostile, by stating that she has never

met the Petitioner and that she has never been in a love

relationship with the deceased. The prosecution has unable to

prove the motive on part of the Petitioner/Accused no.1 to commit

the offence of murder.

24. It is submitted that none of the witnesses and evidence

produced before the Court show that the Petitioner was last seen

with the deceased. In the material witnesses in the case, the

witnesses have only stated that the deceased Pawan Kumar was

present with some unknown persons. Further the Respondent

police have failed to ascertain the identity of the Petitioner through

the test identification parade.

25. The deposition of intended last seen witness CW6/PW5 one

Vinay @ Subramanya is full of contradiction and cannot be relied

upon. The said witness has deposed in his chief and cross

examination that it was only through the Respondent police that he

became aware of the identity of the Petitioner/Accused no. 1.

Furthermore there is nothing to corroborate the fact that the said

witness did visit the Gangamma temple, Hoskote on 06/09/2019

between 9PM- 10PM. This is evident from his deposition when he

 states that he was aware of the fact that the Gangamma temple,

Hoskote would be closed at around 9PM-10PM, therefore, his

statement that he visited the temple at such late hours, raises

serious doubts about the veracity of his deposition.

26. The deposition of all the witnesses examined before learned

Sessions Judge is full of contradiction. None of the witness

corroborate the case of the prosecution with respect to the date of

deceased going missing or the date of finding the body of the

deceased. Further the deposition of the witnesses is entirely

contradictory and cannot be relied upon.

27. That all the material witnesses have been examined by the

learned Sessions Judge and their deposition has been taken on

record. Therefore there is no threat of life or limb to the witnesses.

28. It is most respectfully submitted that the Petitioner/Accused

No 1 is innocent of the offences alleged against him as there is not

an iota of material either in the final report pointing to any overact

on part of the Petitioner/Accused No 1 leading to the death of the

deceased Pawan Kumar.

29. The offence alleged against the petitioner is even through

punishable with extreme penalty of death, the facts and

circumstances do not disclose any reasonable grounds to suspect

that the petitioner is guilty of such an offence punishable with the

extreme penalty of capital punishment.

30. There are no other material available on record connecting

present Petitioner/Accused No 1 with the offence of the murder and

confession statement is not at all admissible as an evidence in the

court of law. The Petitioner/Accused no.1 has neither involved nor

was a party to anything to do with the deceased. Despite this the

Petitioner/Accused No 1 has been made as a party in the FIR

arrayed as Accused.

31. The petitioner comes from a respectable family and has a good

reputation in the society. The prolonged trial and his continued

detention along with the hardened criminals inside the jail will

certainly have an adverse impact on his morals, mental and physical

stability. Also, it will have adverse impact on the welfare of his aged

parents, as there is no one to take care of the welfare of the family.

 There need not be any apprehension that the petitioner may be

involved in any future offence, in the event of his release on bail.

32. The Petitioner is a permanent resident of Hosakote town

having both movable and immovable property. He has deep roots in

the society and aged parents who are solely dependent upon the

Petitioner/Accused for their livelihood. The Petitioner/Accused being

the only male earning member in the family, the livelihood of his

parents have become very difficult after his arrest. The true copy of

the Aadhar card of is produced herewith as Annexure C.

33. The Petitioner/Accused No 1 is prepared to furnish adequate

and acceptable surety to ensure his appearance in the court

throughout the trial and cooperate with the police authorities as and

when required in all present and future investigation.

34. The Petitioner/Accused is prepared to abide by the terms and

conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court in the event

of release.
 PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the petitioner prays that for the reasons amongst

other which may be urged at the time of hearing, the Hon’ble High

Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused no. 1 on

bail in SC No 369/2020, Hosakote Police Station for the offences

punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860, pending on the file of the Hon’ble VIIIth Additional

District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, and direct his

release from the judicial custody, in the interest of justice and

equity.

Bengaluru

Date: 16/11/2021 Advocate for the Petitioner