MANANDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner - accused No.2, who is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Ss. 302 , 120-B read with Sec. 34 of IPC, is before this Court to enlarge him on bail.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner - accused No.2 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.

(3.) The defacto complainant lodged the FIR alleging that, the accused No.1, Chidanand used to come to the farm house during odd hours and talk to her daughter-in-law. In this regard, Ramanna had warned the accused No.1 not to visit the said farmhouse during odd hours, and not to talk to his wife. Hence, the defacto complainant suspected that, his son has been killed by the accused No.1 by taking assistance of some other persons. The accused No.1 was arrested on 31/12/2022, and in confession statement, he is alleged to have stated that, he conspired the accused No.2 to do away the life of the deceased, since the said Ramanna had become an obstacle in their intimate relationship. Based on the confession statement of accused No.1, the accused No.2 was arrested, and in her confession statement, admitted the commission of crime. The accused No.2 has been solely implicated on the basis of confession statement of accused No.1, and also on her confession statement. The confession statement is inadmissible in law, unless it is corroborated in material particulars. The petitioner - accused No.2 has made out a prima facie case to enlarge her on bail. Accordingly, I pass the following;