FYROZ E K Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have been arraigned as Accused Nos.5 & 6 in C.C No. 145/ 2010 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and Additional/CJM, Arsikere, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307 and 302 r/w. 149 of IPC. One Mohammed Ghouse is the deceased in the case.

(2.) ACCORDING to the case of the prosecution, on 05.10.2010 at about 9.30 a.m., the complainant-Muhid alias Gousesab came to Arsikere Town from Hassan along with his brothers Pasha and Mansur to enquire about the incident that had occurred on the previous day, in which one Davud Khan was injured. After meeting Davud Khan, when the complainant accompanied by Mohammed Ghouse, the deceased and others were going near a hotel, Accused No.1-Munna came from the opposite direction. On seeing Accused No. 1, the complainant and others questioned him as to why he assaulted Davud Khan on the previous day. This led to quarrel between the two sides. In that quarrel, Accused No.1-Munna and other accused including this petitioner assaulted the complainant, as well as Mohammed Ghouse with hockey stick, fire wood etc. causing severe injuries to both the complainant and Mohammed Ghouse. The said Mohammed Ghouse succumbed to the injuries later. Immediately, after the incident, both the injured persons were taken to the hospital and while the complainant was taking treatment in the hospital, police recorded his statement at about 11.45 p.m. on 05.10.2010. On the basis of said recorded statement police registered the case in Crime No. 146/2010 initially for the offence punishable under Section 307 r/w Section 34 of IPC. On receipt of the death memo of Mohammed Ghouse, offence under Section 302 of IPC came to be added. During investigation, these petitioners and others were apprehended and were later subjected to judicial custody. As the prayer of these petitioners for bail came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, the petitioners are before this Court seeking the relief of bail.

(3.) AS could be seen from the allegations made in the complaint, no overt act is attributed against these petitioners. However, according to the further statement said to have been made by Mujamil, who was stated to be an eye-witness, the 1st petitioner assaulted the complainant with a hockey stick, while petitioner No.2 kicked the deceased. According to the medical evidence, the cause of death of the deceased was injury to his head, which according to the prosecution was caused by Accused No. 1. It is noticed that this Court in Criminal Petition Nos.5733/2010 and 6061/ 2010 has granted bail to Accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 7 on the premise that the overt acts attributed against them prima facie do not attract the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 302 of IPC. Having regard to the overt acts attributed against these petitioners, I am of the considered opinion that these petitioners stand on the same footing as that of the other accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail. Therefore, on the principles of parity, these petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail.