AMBRESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also High Court Government Pleader through video conference.

(2.) The petitioner has contended that though the case is filed under Section 498(A) , 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r) , 3 (1)(s) , 3(1)(w) and 2(5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 but there are no material against this petitioner. The trial commenced in the year 2018. So the question of tampering the witnesses does not arise as all the witnesses i.e. now CW.1 to CW16 all of them have turned hostile. There are only official witnesses who are yet to be examined. The contentions of the charge sheet indicates that the provisions of offences alleged are not attracted. The post mortem report also does not indicate that deceased consuming any poison or pesticides. The statement of the deceased was not recorded. So there are no reasonable ground for believing that accused has committed the offences and prayed to release the accused on bail.

(3.) The learned High Court Government Pleader has field the objection contending that in case some witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution, it is not a ground to release the accused on bail. There are police records which make allegation and support the case of prosecution. It is also contended that the petitioner may commit again the similar type of offences and may tamper the rest of the witnesses and he may not be available for trial and flee from justice. With these main contentions, the State has prayed to reject the bail petition.