SHARUKH KHAN Vs. STATE BY KUNIGAL POLICE STATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners through video conferencing and learned HCGP for the respondent-State who is present before the Court physically. Perused the records.

(2.) This petition is filed by petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Cr.No.161/2020 of Kunigal police station for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B , 307 , 201 read with 149 of IPC . The petitioners/accused Nos. 5 and 6 are in judicial custody since from the date of their arrest. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners is seeking for enlarge the petitioners on regular bail among the grounds urged therein.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners during the course of his arguments has contended that the petitioners are innocents and they have not committed any offence as alleged in the complaint and they have been falsely implicated by the complainant. Initially, the case was registered against two unknown persons. After few days, these petitioners along with four persons were implicated to this case on the statement given by the complainant. It is stated in the remand application that on 14.08.2020 and 18.08.2020 during investigation, the police have arrested these petitioners and seized the Santro car bearing Reg. No.KA-01-MA- 1661 which is alleged to have been used by the petitioners for the commission of offence. But there is no materials found place against the petitioners for commission of an alleged offences as narrated. But one of the of the accused is a car dealer and approached by accused No.1 for the trial of the said vehicle and thereafter, the said vehicle was allegedly used for committing of offence which was beyond the knowledge of these petitioners. It is further contended that these petitioners hail from respectable family having good reputation in the society. The alleged offences are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life and there is no legal embargo to release them on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contends that the petitioners are permanent residents of Bengaluru and are ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court. On these grounds, the learned counsel prays for bail.