THIRUKUMAR @ KUTTY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by the petitioner -accused No. 1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 353, 307, 399 and 402 of IPC and 25 & 3 of Indian Arms Act registered in respondent police station in Crime No. 141/2013. Brief facts of the case are that it is stated in the complaint that, on 27.06.2013 at about 11.35 A.M., when the complainant was on duty, he said to have received credible information that, the petitioner -accused No. 1 and his associates by parking TATA Indica Car bearing Registration No. KA -50 -4021 at Oriental Technology Pvt., Ltd., Station Road, Shivajinagar, Bangalore making preparation to commit the murder of one Vijaykumar @ Kavala and his associates and also to commit dacoity. Immediately, the complainant and his staff and panchas came to the spot, encircled the accused and put them to their custody. However, two persons escaped from the spot. The petitioner -accused No. 1 said to have pointing the pistol and made attempt to fire on the complainant to do away his life. The complainant and his staff seized the car, pistol, bullets, dragger, chopper and mobile phones etc., in the basis of the complaint, the case was registered and the petitioner has been arrested.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner -accused No. 1 and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent -State.

(3.) AS against this, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent State, during the course of the arguments, submitted that the petitioner is the main accused in the case. He was holding pistol and he tried to fire on the complainant to commit murder. The learned Government Pleader further submitted that the said pistol has been seized at the instance of the petitioner accused. He further submitted that looking to the allegations made against the petitioner, they are not one and the same made as against the other accused persons. He further submitted that the petitioner had involved in many other cases as observed by the trial court in the bail order and hence, he is not entitled to be released on bail.