RAJU Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petitioner (accused No. 2) along with two accused persons is charge sheeted in Crime No. 361/2013 of Kudachi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 302, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(2.) A similar petition moved by him along with accused No. 1 in Crl. P. No. 100120/2014 was rejected and the accused No. 1 was enlarged on bail. However, he had moved another petition in Crl. P. No. 100966/2014, but withdrew the same with liberty to move a fresh bail petition.

(3.) SRI M.H. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody from 11.12.2013. As per the post -mortem report the death is due to head injury connected with neurogenic shock. But, there is no corresponding external head injury on the dead body. Though there were marks on the interscapular region and on the limbs with some abrasions, the intracranial hemorrhage, which is found in the post mortem report will not corroborate with those injury marks. The reason for death of the deceased may be due to some other reason. The incident is alleged to have occurred at 9.00 a.m. After a long deliberation, complaint is lodged at 8'o clock in the evening. He has been falsely implicated in the case. The accused No. 1, who stands in the same footing is enlarged on bail by this Court. He is a family person and does not have any criminal background and there was no motive on his part to do away with the life of the deceased. He was not the owner of the vehicle and his complicity in the alleged incident is doubtful. Though the charge sheet is filed, it may take a considerable time for the trial to conclude. Under the circumstances, petition may be allowed.