GANGADHARA @ CHARSI AND KESHAVASWAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are arrayed as A34 and A35 in CC No. 1696/2012 on the file of the JMFC, Nelamangala, registered for the offences under Sections, 143, 147, 148, 120B, 341, 323, 324, 302, 307, 427, 506, 114 r/w 149 IPC and under Section 25 & 27 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959, are before this Court praying for enlarging them on bail. It is the case of the prosecution, deceased B.M.L. Krishnappa was a member of the Zilla Panchayat, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore. There were differences between him and A1 in connection with A1 having murdered one Basaiah in the year 2005, who was a follower of the present deceased B.M.L. Krishnappa. Further, in retaliation to the same, in the year 2009, one Devi-brother of A1 had been murdered by the followers of the present deceased B.M.L. Krishnappa. Apart from this, A1 and his followers had made an attempt on the life of the present deceased in the year 2009. On account of this, they were nursing grudge against each other. It is the case of the prosecution, the accused in the case, on account of the rivalry that existed between A1 and the deceased, hatched a conspiracy to finish off the deceased. Such conspiracy, according to the prosecution, had been hatched by the accused in the case since 10.07.2012. Such being the position, it is the case of the prosecution, on 25.07.2012, the deceased accompanied with C.Ws. 1, 2, 12 and 13 proceeded in a Innova Car driven by C.W. 3 towards his village Arashinakunte, coming within the jurisdiction of Nelamangala Police Station. He was followed by C.Ws. 4, 12 and 13 in another car. Apart from that, C.Ws. 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 followed the deceased in Pajero car. When the deceased was about to take a deviation to proceed to his village Arashinakunte near the service road junction located at NH4, the accused, who had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons and were waiting for the deceased at the said place sitting in their respective cars intercepted the car of the deceased at the said place. Thereafter, it is alleged the accused in pursuance of the conspiracy hatched and in pursuance of the common object of unlawful assembly, they hackled the deceased after dragging him out of the car. Further, when C.W. 1 intervened to rescue the deceased, he was also assaulted by the accused and attempted to commit his murder. Apart from this, the other witnesses, who were following the deceased, among whom C.W. 4-gunman, who was in the second car along with C.Ws. 12 and 13, seeing the deceased being attacked and heckled by the accused, opened fire with the SBBL gun, which was provided to him, on the accused. The shot fired by him landed on A9, who died at the spot. Thereafter, it is the case of the prosecution, altercations took place between the two groups in which accused are alleged to have assaulted and caused injuries to C.W. 3-driver of the car. After committing the offence, according to the prosecution, the accused left the spot.

(2.) The present accused, who are A34 and A35, came to be arrested by the police during the course of investigation on 12.8.2012. They are in custody since that date.

(3.) Sri C.H. Jadhav, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners contends, the material placed on record reveals that these two petitioners were not present at the time when the occurrence took place. According to the prosecution, after the commission of the offence, A4 called A34 on his cell phone and requested him to provide a hired car and send the same to the hide out place located near Golden Palm Resort, which is situated off to NH4. He further submits, in pursuance of the same, A34 secured an Innova car and directed A35 to go to the place indicated by A4 and accordingly., A35 went to the said place and from there he picked up A6, 11, 18 and dropped them to Yeshwantpur railway station. He further submits names of these persons have figured in pursuance of the further statements made by C.W.-1 on 15.10.2012, C.W.-6 on 15.10.2012 and the statement of C.W.-163 recorded on 28.7.2012, implicating only A35. He also submitted the other connecting material placed by the prosecution to connect these accused with the alleged crime is extra judicial confession made by A4 before C.W.-310. He submits the statements of said witness has been recorded on 18.10.2012. He further submits, insofar as the conspiracy is concerned, it is figured only during the extra judicial confession made by A4 before the aforesaid witness. There is nothing on record to show that these two accused had indulged themselves in hatching conspiracy to finish off the deceased. He, further submits, this Court in Crl.P. Nos. 3698/2013 and 3087/2013 has granted regular bail and anticipatory bail to A38 and A41 in this case. He submits the case of these petitioners do not stand on a different footing than that of A38, who has been granted regular bail by this Court. He, further submits, having regard to the material that has been placed against these two petitioners as admittedly they were not present at the spot when the occurrence took place and in view of the role attributed to them coupled with the fact that A38 and A41 who are similarly placed as that of these two petitioners have been granted bail, the petitioners also be enlarged on bail.