SHIVANNA NAIK Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by the petitioner -accused No. 2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent -Police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No. 127/2015.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the prosecution case are that complainant is the wife of deceased, deceased was the owner of the tractor, which was attached to Meghana Agro Seeds Private Ltd. Co., run by the owner Mr. Venkatesh Naik. Since the deceased was not punctual, his lorry was detached and accused No. 1 Venkatesh called the deceased to come to Kotturu to discuss the matter. Next day it was informed to Smt. Jyothi -complainant that deceased dead, she in turn lodged complaint registered in UDR No. 18/2015 on 17.07.2015. Subsequently, on 13.08.2015 she lodged another complaint stating that her husband was murdered by the petitioner and another, which is registered in Crime No. 127/2015 for the said offences.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the UDR complaint it is mentioned that there was a note book by the side of the deceased, wherein it is mentioned that Shivu Naik -petitioner herein, who was working under Venkatesh is responsible for the death. Subsequently, complaint was filed, which was registered in Crime No. 127/2015. It is further mentioned that both accused Nos. 1 and 2 have administered poison and thereafter, they have assaulted the deceased and both are responsible for the death of the deceased. Learned counsel has submitted that there are no direct witnesses so far as assault is concerned and case of the prosecution rests on the circumstantial evidence. Even if, the entry made in the note book is taken to be true for the appreciation of the case, then the offence would be at the most come under Section 306 of IPC and not under Section 302 of IPC. Petitioner is having apprehension of his arrest at the hands of the respondent Police and if arrested unnecessarily he will be kept in jail. He has submitted that petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed on him and also ready to cooperate with the investigation machinery in the investigation of the case. Hence, he has submitted to release the petitioner on bail by imposing reasonable conditions.