KALPANA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 4 on bail, in the event of their arrest in respect of Crime No.91/2021 registered by the Honnavalli Police Station, Tumakuru City, for the offences punishable under Ss. 323 , 324 , 448 , 504 , 506 (B) read with Sec. 34 of IPC.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that on 26/7/2021 at about 8.00 a.m., accused Nos. 1 to 4 quarrelled with CW1 in connection with land dispute and also allegation that they trespassed into the house when CW2 questioned, accused Nos.1 and 3 for having clubs in their hands inflicted injury with the club. When CW2 came to rescue accused No.1 assaulted with the club and also snatched the machete from accused No.4 and accused No.1 inflicted injury on both the legs and knee. Accused No.3 kicked CW2 and accused No.2 snatched the club from accused No.4 and inflicted injury on the head of the victim and assaulted CW2 and all of them caused the life threat to the victim.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these two petitioners were not present at the spot and they have been falsely implicated to the case. Learned counsel also brought to the notice of this Court that the history given by CW2 before the doctor, when he was taken to the hospital, he mentioned the name of only accused Nos.1 and 2 and not mentioned the names of these two petitioners and also an allegation against these petitioners is that they abused in a filthy language and first petitioner kicked the CW2 and 2nd petitioner abused in a filthy language. Accused No.1 snatched the club and inflicted the injury and also cause the life threat. A very case of the prosecution is doubtful with regard to the presence of these two petitioners. Apart from that, the learned counsel submits that the case and counter case are registered against each parties and investigation has been completed and charge sheet has already been filed and no prima-facie case is made out against these two petitioners and it is also submitted that these two petitioners are women folk and they have been falsely implicated to the case.