B. MAHESH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent -State. Perused the records.

(2.) THE Sandur police have submitted a charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 392 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.' for brevity) and also under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity).

(3.) THE learned High Court Government Pleader has drawn my attention that soon before the death of deceased he had a talk with a person and had stated that petitioner was also there with him in the said petrol pump at about 11. p.m. and one Krishna i.e., another witness was present with deceased upto 11 p.m. on that particular day and thereafter he went away from petrol pump. At that time said Krishna has also seen the petitioner coming to petrol pump and had stayed with deceased Nagaraj. Subsequent to the death of Nagaraj, after some days, petitioner was arrested and some amount was recovered at his instance and very particularly his blood stained clothes were recovered. The police have also secured the finger print expert to the petrol pump and he has taken specimen of fingerprints of petitioner. The fingerprints expert has given his statement by stating that the thumb impression of petitioner matches with one of the finger prints detected in petrol pump. Therefore, in my opinion, all these materials show the involvement of accused in the commission of offence.