SHIVA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and the learned counsel Sri Tejas N, who assisted the prosecution in the matter in view of the application filed in I.A.No.1/2024.

(2.) Admittedly, this petitioner had earlier approached this Court and this Court had rejected the same. Once again successive bail petition was also filed in Crl.P.No.482/2021 and this Court while rejecting the said petition taken note of the earlier Crl.P.No.4807/2019 and also the judgments, which were relied upon by the learned counsel for languishing the accused for a longer period in jail. This Court also taken note of the specific overt-act alleged against this petitioner. This Court also taken note that there are ten eye-witnesses to the incident and the petitioner inflicted injury to the victim with deadly weapon knife and there were 25 multiple injuries and as a result, he succumbed to the injuries.

(3.) Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner in a successive bail petition contend that out of ten eye-witnesses, P.W.5 and P.W.6 have not supported the case of the prosecution. The learned counsel submits that this Court granted bail in favour of accused No.3 in Crl.P.No.12832/2023 vide order dtd. 20/12/2023 and produced the order copy and also deposition of P.W.5 and P.W.6. The learned counsel submits that this petitioner is in custody from last 4-5 years and some of the witnesses have been examined and some of the eye-witnesses have given up before the Trial Court and hence the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.