'Conviction impossible': HC refuses trial against accused in Karnataka's oldest criminal case

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has refused trial against a 68-year-old person from Bengaluru in a murder case registered 44 years ago in the undivided Dakshina Kannada district. 

"If the facts are noticed, the impossibility of conviction of the petitioner looms large. Therefore, if acquittal is imminent in a trial, permitting such trial against the accused would be nothing but a waste of precious judicial time… Thus, ends the oldest case, in the criminal justice system, of the state, perhaps, which is 44 years old," Justice M Nagaprasanna said in his order. 

The court noted this while allowing the petition filed by Chandra alias Chandrashekar Bhat.

The Udupi police had registered this case on June 8, 1979. The prosecution case was that there was a dispute with regard to a land belonging to Sri Admar Math in Udupi where one Seetharama Bhat was a tenant. 

Bhat and one Kitta alias Krishnappa had allegedly stabbed Narayanan Nair and another person by name Kunhirama. A severely injured Kunhirama succumbed to injuries in the hospital. 

After a full-fledged trial, Bhat and Kitta were convicted while two other accused Sanjeeva Handa and Basava Handa were acquitted. In the appeal proceeding, Kitta was acquitted while Bhat’s conviction was upheld. 

The petitioner, who is the son-in-law of Sanjeeva Handa, claimed that he was employed from 1979 till 2022 in various capacities in Bengaluru and that he was neither summoned nor was any warrant ever served on him. 

He filed an application before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Udupi, seeking anticipatory bail when he came to know that Udupi police were searching for him. He moved the high court after this application was rejected. 

Chandra submitted that the reasons rendered by the trial court while acquitting two in the case should be applied to him. The government advocate submitted that the petitioner was absconding throughout, and therefore, a split charge was drawn way back in 1980. 

Justice Nagaprasanna observed that of the four accused who stood trial, two were acquitted for not being identified by eyewitnesses. The court further noted that the one who was convicted had completed his sentence and is out of the prison. 

"The witnesses who deposed then i.e., 44 years back are impossible to be secured today and the reasons rendered by the concerned court qua other accused who are acquitted are straight away applicable to the petitioner as his identification for driving home the presence of the petitioner in the alleged scene of crime is extremely doubtful. It would only be a waste of judicial time which is too precious today, if the petitioner is permitted to be tried 44 years after the crime. To save such precious judicial time, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the crime against the petitioner,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.