LAWS(KAR)-2014-4-37

M. RAJA Vs. STATE

Decided On April 07, 2014
M. RAJA Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by petitioners/accused Nos. 1 and 2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 registered in respondent -police station Crime No. 561/2013.

(2.) HEARD the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners -accused Nos. 1 and 2 and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent -State.

(3.) AS per the averments in the complaint one Munikrishnappa lodged the complaint dated 12.9.2013 wherein it is mentioned that some unknown persons assaulted the deceased Srinivas and caused bleeding injuries. Therefore, at the first instance, FIR was registered against unknown persons. Six days thereafter, the complainant gave his further statement raising suspicion on accused Nos. 1 and 2 that there was property dispute between accused Nos. 1 and 2 and the deceased. Looking to the materials collected during investigation there is a joint recovery at the instance of accused Nos. 1 and 2 and except the joint recovery of the weapon, there is no other material produced by the prosecution prima facie to show the involvement of these two petitioners in the commission of the alleged offences. In the statement of witnesses C.Ws. 10 and 11, they have not stated that the four persons who have assaulted the deceased and caused bleeding injuries are the present petitioners and accused Nos. 3 and 4. Therefore, the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. As I have already observed that complaint was against unknown persons. Six days thereafter when the further statement of the complainant was recorded, a suspicion was raised by the complainant against the present petitioners. Therefore, it cannot be said that at this stage, the prosecution has placed the material to show the overt act done by the present petitioners on the deceased and caused bleeding injuries, thereby causing his death. Only on the joint recovery of the weapon at this stage, the Court cannot infer the involvement of the petitioners in the commission of the alleged offences. This Court has ordered for release of accused Nos. 3 and 4 on bail by order dated 11.3.2014 in Crl.P. No. 1145/2014. Now the investigation of the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. To secure the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court during the trial proceedings, stringent conditions can be imposed and they may be admitted to bail.