AMIT Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by the petitioner -accused No. 7 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 326 read with Section 149 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No. 162/2014 and subsequently, offence under Section 302 of IPC was also inserted in the case.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case as per the averments in the complaint that father of the deceased lodged the complaint on 24.09.2014 stating that complainant and deceased went to Masjid for offering prayer and at about 7.20 p.m. they returned home. Thereafter, the deceased went out to meet his friends, and at about 8.30 p.m. when the complainant was in the house, somebody telephoned and informed that somebody had assaulted Firoz and he had fallen down and he was shifted to Civil Hospital, Belagavi. Immediately, complainant took his wife and daughter Shabaz along with family members went to KLE Hospital, wherein the complainant noticed that the deceased sustained 15 to 16 stab injuries to the back side of the deceased and 5 to 6 injuries on his chest and on the abdomen. Thereafter, he came to know that on 24.09.2014 at about 7.20 p.m. the deceased had gone to Kata ground near Sant Meera School and between 7.20 p.m. and 8.30 p.m. some miscreants had assaulted the deceased. Further the complainant has got informed that one Vinay, Sushya and Maruti and otherS were appeared on the spot of the incident. On the basis of the said complaint, case has been registered for the alleged offences, but subsequently, offence under Section 302 of IPC was also inserted in the case.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that accused Nos. 3, 6, 8 and 9 were already released on bail by the order of the learned Sessions Judge. He has submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted the deceased on the head portion with the broken bottle, but looking to the FSL report there is no blood stains on the said bottle. He has also submitted that the incident has taken place during night, hence, it raises reasonable doubt as to how the eye -witnesses have seen the incident. Even if, the eye -witnesses have told the name of the accused persons to the complainant, complainant ought to have mentioned the name of the petitioner in the complaint. He has further submitted that perusing the entire charge sheet material, there is no prima -facie case made out as against the petitioner and in the original complaint his name was not figured, so also in the FIR, which was registered in the case. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the order of this Court reported in 2014 Cr. R. 811 (Kant.) rendered in Crl. P. No. 4655/2014 decided on 9.09.2014.