SRIMANTH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRIMINAL Petition No. 200197/2014 is filed by accused No. 3 whereas, Criminal Petition No. 200198/2014 is filed by accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4, seeking bail in Crime No. 162/2013 of Hulsoor Police Station, Bidar, which is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 506, 307, 302, 109, 120B r/w Section 149 of IPC. On completion of the investigation, the charge sheet is filed. Accused Nos. 7 and 8 are shown as absconding accused in the charge sheet.

(2.) THE allegation in the charge sheet is that, the deceased Vaijinath Patil was a generous person. He had constructed a Saibaba temple in his village. The magnanimity and generosity of the deceased irritated the accused persons, who were the disciples of Bhagwat Maharaj. All the eight accused persons conspired to do away with the life of the deceased while he is sleeping in the Saibaba temple. They further planned to steal the 'hundi' of the temple, so that it appears as an incident of 'dacoity'. CW -23/the servant of accused No. 1, since overheard the conspiracy, they warned him with dire consequence, if he ever disclosed the matter to anyone. On 14.8.2013, the accused persons formed unlawful assembly, they carried deadly weapons with them and entered the Saibaba temple, assaulted the deceased, who was sleeping. On hearing the screaming of the deceased, the Archak of the temple came out of his house, the accused put threat and sent him back. They assaulted the deceased with their weapons all over his body, stabbed him and amputated his earlobe. CW -25, who was also sleeping in the same temple, since interfered and questioned the accused, accused Nos. 1 to 4 assaulted him with their weapons. Consequently, CW -25 suffered head injury and became unconscious. By presuming that CW -25 expired, the accused snatched his mobile and left the place with the 'hundi' of the temple. They disposed the 'hundi' and mobile in a nearly sugarcane plantation.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that, the case of the prosecution is infirm and fraught with inconsistencies and artificiality.