9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1952X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im at 12.00 a.m. on 18.2.2018, but by that time Vidwat had already been admitted to Mallya Hospital, Therefore, the incident alleged by Arun Babu cannot be per se believed and as rightly argued by the Special Public Prosecutor, it could be a stage managed complaint at the instance of the petitioner - the very registration of a case at the instance of Arun Babu appears to be due to intervention of a police officer. Inference can be drawn to this effect and therefore unhesitatingly it can be said that from the first hour itself, the petitioner tried to manage the police and definitely it was an act of interference. It is true that the seizure panchanamas do not disclose seizure of knuckle rings. But in the complaint made by Praveen Venkatachalaiah, there is a reference to employing the rings for hitting. If the I.O. did not seize rings, it cannot be a ground to suspect the prosecution case at this stage. It is well established principle, even the learned counsel for the petitioner argued, that for constituting an offence punishable under section 307 of IPC, a weapon need not always be used - Even if the intention was not there, if the prosecution is able to prove, that the accused ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder section 307 of IPC was added in the FIR. 3. The petitioner moved the Court of Session for bail and his application was rejected. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri C.V. Nagesh and the Special Public Prosecutor, Sri M.S. Shyamsundar, assisted by advocate Sri Murthy Dayanand Naik appearing for applicant, Sri A. Alam Pasha whose application under section 301(2) Cr.P.C. was allowed 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that a drunken brawl in a bar and restaurant has unnecessarily been given a hype by the media, both print and electronic, just because the petitioner happens to be a son of sitting MLA. He argues that looking into the offences invoked by the police in the FIR, except the offence under section 326 IPC, all other offences are bailable. He argues that in the facts and circumstances, the offence under section 326 of IPC also does not get attracted. In this context, he argues that in the first information report, given by Praveen Venkatachalaiah, it is written that Vidwat was hit with bottles and jugs. According to him, bottle is not a deadly weapon; neither a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fast recovery, he was considered to be shifted out of I.C.U. On the insistence of his family members, he was kept in I.C.U. A cardiologist who examined him, found that he was normal and fit to be transferred out of I.C.U. He was found fit to be discharged from the hospital on 27.2.2018 or 28.2.2018. The other doctors also opined that Vidwat could be sent home. On 25.2.2018, Vidwat made series of complaints and his behavior was such as to fabricate the physical symptoms (malingering). He refused discharge. The doctor has clearly written in the discharge summary that the injuries sustained by the patient were not life threatening and that there did not take place an untoward incident during his stay in the hospital. Therefore, he argues that discharge summary itself can be based to hold that the injuries that Vidwat has sustained, are not really life threatening. Neither an offence punishable under section 326 of IPC nor 307 of IPC is made out from the medical records. This is a point to be taken into consideration while assessing the existence of prima facie materials in relation to offences alleged against the petitioner for the purpose of granting bail. 8. It is his fourth poi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d which had all the consequences of taking away his life, but for the timely medical intervention. 12. He argues that the influence of the petitioner can be demonstrated from the records available before the court. His line of argument is that the investigation officer was not provided with discharge summary in spite of requesting the hospital authorities repeatedly, though he has all the right to have a copy of it for the purpose of fair investigation. But the petitioner is able to produce a copy of discharge summary which is also found to be unbelievable because it was signed by a doctor who is very well known to one person who identifies himself with the father of the petitioner. The way the discharge summary is written itself shows that right from inception, the petitioner and his supporters have managed to tamper with the medical documents. When the first informant has stated very clearly in his report that the injured Vidwat was unconscious when he was taken to hospital, the discharge summary discloses that he was conscious and well oriented. The first informant says that the petitioner and his supporters came to Mallya Hospital soon after admission of the injured and misb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n at 11.45 p.m. The complaint was not registered immediately. The FIR shows that it was registered at 3.30 a.m. on 18.2.2018. The inspector-in-charge of Cubbon Park Police station did not register FIR immediately on coming to know that it was lodged against the son of a sitting MLA. The station house officer would go to the extent of receiving counter complaint against the injured Vidwat from one Arun Babu. It was registered in Crime No. 23/2018 in relation to an incident said to have taken place at 10.30 p.m. on 17.2.2018 at Fergy Cafe. Though this report made by Arun Babu was registered at 5.30 a.m., he was taken to Bowring and Lady Curzon Hospital Bengaluru for treatment where he would disclose the history that he was assaulted on 18.2.2018 at 12.00 a.m. by an unknown person at U.B. city. This unknown person is none other than Vidwat as mentioned in the first information given by Arun Babu. By 12.00 O'clock in the night, Vidwat had already been admitted to Mallya Hospital. So by comparing the first information registered in Crime No. 23/2018 and the OPD slip, it can be very well said that it is a false complaint, stage managed by the petitioner and his supporters to give a c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prima facie material against the petitioner. 20. With regard to the word 'jug' that he emphasized while arguing on the first day, he replied that what is written in the complaint is 'jug' only. If it could be read as 'ring', the letter 'n' is not seen there. Therefore, he has correctly employed the word 'jug' which could have been used at the time of assault. In this regard, he submitted that even if it could be read as 'ring' for argument sake, the police should have seized the rings during investigation. The seizure panchanama shows seizure of two material objects, viz. glass pieces and ice buckets. With regard to ice bucket, he submitted that it could be referred to as 'jug' also. Even in the two remand applications dated 19.2.2018 and 21.2.2018, there is just a mention of a trivial incident. There is no reference to seizure of the rings or the knuckle rings. 21. Referring to the arguments of the Spl. Public Prosecutor with regard to discharge summary, it is his reply that there is no need to make a big issue as to how the petitioner could have accessed to it. It is his submission that a TV channel accessed discharge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner's father and argued that this is the amount of interest that the media channels are trying to make a false propaganda against the petitioner and his father. The materials placed before the court clearly show that the injuries sustained by Vidwat do not take the whole case beyond section 325 of IPC. 25. At last, he referred to two judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Shyam Sharma v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another [(2017) 9 SCC 362] and Ved Pal v. State of U.P. [1987 (Supp) Supreme Court Cases 596] and some of the judgments of this court in Mohammed Ali v. State of Karnataka [2016 (2) Kar.L.J. 505], Budeppa Gouda and another v. State of Karnataka [2017 (3) Kar.L.J. 369], Ramesh v. State by Kunigal Police and another [2015 (2) Kar.L.J. 584 (DB)], and Mallikarjun and others v. State of Karnataka [2016 (2) KCCR 1110], and submitted that despite the accused being charged for the offence punishable under section 307 of IPC, the courts have brought down the whole incident within the ambit of lesser offences like 323 or 324 of IPC. 26. After hearing both sides, firstly I would like to refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court which has been relied upon by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IPC could be made out, is also not acceptable. The medical report shows that the injured Vidwat has sustained grievous injuries. In the first information report there is a reference to using bottles and rings for assaulting the injured. Just because the medical records do not disclose even a scratch-mark on the person of the injured, it cannot be said that the bottles were not used for assaulting. Whether a bottle can be employed as an instrument for inflicting injuries or not, depends on how it is made use of. It is not necessary always that the bottle must be broken and used for committing an offence. The bottle which is a hard substance, if used for assault, is likely to cause fractures. Therefore, the argument advanced by the leaned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted at this stage. Further, it is for the trial judge to decide at the stage of framing charge as to which offence is actually attracted from the evidence collected by the I.O. At the stage of deciding a bail application, usurping on the jurisdiction of the trial judge is not permitted. It is only from the complaint, the first information report and other evidence collected by the investigator, an endeavour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Arun Babu cannot be per se believed and as rightly argued by the Special Public Prosecutor, it could be a stage managed complaint at the instance of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner while replying, very intelligently, did not meet this point at all. He only submitted that a case and a counter case were registered. At this stage, I am of the pinion that the very registration of a case at the instance of Arun Babu appears to be due to intervention of a police officer. Inference can be drawn to this effect and therefore unhesitatingly it can be said that from the first hour itself, the petitioner tried to manage the police and definitely it was an act of interference. 31. It is true that the seizure panchanamas do not disclose seizure of knuckle rings. But in the complaint made by Praveen Venkatachalaiah, there is a reference to employing the rings for hitting. If the I.O. did not seize rings, it cannot be a ground to suspect the prosecution case at this stage. It is well established principle, even the learned counsel for the petitioner argued, that for constituting an offence punishable under section 307 of IPC, a weapon need not always be used. The Hon' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entitled to a copy of it. Before the investigation officer could get a copy of it, if discharge summary could be accessed by a TV Channel, it only shows somebody's intervention. It is true, as has been argued by Sri C.V. Nagesh, the prosecution had with it, a document pertaining to nature of injuries sustained by Vidwat, but nothing can be made out from the prosecution records that on 5.3.2018, investigation officer was provided with a copy of discharge summary. Be that controversy as it may, the source of access can also be ignored; but the way it is written cannot be ignored. Especially the sentence that 'no untoward incident took place ....' cannot be ignored. The argument of Sri C.V. Nagesh to ignore this point was to his convenience. In my opinion the doctor who has issued the discharge summary, appears to have exceeded his limits. It is very pertinent to mention here that the very same doctor goes to the extent of giving a statement about the fitness of Vidwat. He has also given a statement that Vidwat has been tutored to delay in giving statement before police. If these statements of doctor are taken into consideration, obliviously a question arises as to what i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t appears to be horrifying and terrifying. Therefore, if a person who wields such an authority and mighty power, if released on bail, it is sure that he uses his position to destroy the evidence. Indeed, bail is a matter concerning the liberty of a person who is detained in prison; pre-conviction detention is discouraged. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with incidents of this nature has held in Neeru Yadav's case (supra) as below: 13. We will be failing in our duty if we do not take note of the concept of liberty and its curtailment by law. It is an established fact that a crime though committed against an individual, in all cases, it does not retain an individual character. It, on occasions and in certain offences, accentuates and causes harm to the society. The victim may be an individual, but in the ultimate eventuate, it is the society which is the victim. A crime, as is understood, creates a dent in the law and order situation. In a civilized society, a crime disturbs orderliness. It affects the peaceful life of the society. An individual can enjoy his liberty which is definitely of paramount value, but he cannot be a law unto himself. He cannot cause harm t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
