LAWS(KAR)-2013-9-291

PRAMOD ARJUN CHANAL, VITTAL KRISHNAPPA NADAGOUDA AND BASAPPA DUNDAPPA NAIK Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH KULGOD POLICE

Decided On September 17, 2013
Pramod Arjun Chanal, Vittal Krishnappa Nadagouda And Basappa Dundappa Naik Appellant
V/S
State Of Karnataka Through Kulgod Police Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor. The facts leading to the case are as follows: The petitioners 1 to 3 are accused of offences punishable under Sections 201 and 302, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.', for brevity). It transpires that, the complainant had reported to the Mudhol Police, of a dead body floating in the Ghataprapha river. It was found that, there was a deep injury from chin to neck, caused by a deadly weapon and there were animal bites on the body of the deceased and both the legs were found to have been tied up. It is in retrospect that it is alleged by the prosecution that, the deceased was sexually harassing the wife of the petitioner No. 1, who was said to be the younger brother of the deceased. On account of which, there was a premeditated murder of the deceased by the petitioners, who were last seen together with the deceased. It is on this suspicious circumstance, that the petitioners have been taken into custody.

(2.) APART from the fact that, there were eyewitnesses to the fact that, the petitioners were seen together with the deceased and the suspicion that the deceased was sexually harassing the wife of the petitioner No. 1, there is no other incriminating material. Except that, it is claimed, the weapon used in the commission of the murder had also been recovered at the instance of the petitioner, there is no other incriminating material to establish that, prima facie the petitioners were involved in the commission of the crime, except the circumstantial evidence that is sought to be projected. In that view of the matter, the petitioners have made out a case for enlargement on bail. The petition is allowed The petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a self bond for a sum of Rs. 30,000/ - each with a solvent surety for a like sum each, subject to the following conditions: