BASAVARAJ Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have preferred this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking to release them on bail in connection with Crime No.280/2015 of Kalghatagi Police Station, Dharwad, now pending in S.C.No.5/2016 on the file of the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 302 R /w. Section 149 of IPC

(2.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. SPP for the respondent-State. Perused the charge sheet and the documents produced along with the charge sheet including the statement made by the accused before the learned Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits, the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence, much less the one alleged in the charge sheet and they are implicated in the case at the instance of the complainant Somalingappa, father of the deceased, as there was dispute between two family members with respect to a backyard. He submits, though learned Sessions Judge has observed in the course of his order that some contrary averments are found in the statement of Mallikarjun, who is the only eyewitness to the incident, has committed an error in rejecting the bail petition filed by the petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The learned Counsel further submits, there is no allegation as to the specific overt act committed by these petitioners. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since 23.09.2015. He further submits that the charge sheet has already been filed and there is no apprehension that, if the petitioners are released on bail, they would obstruct investigation. He submits that, petitioners are agriculturists and permanent residents of Hirehonalli in Kalaghatagi Taluk and that there is no apprehension that, if the petitioners are granted bail, they will not be available for trial. Therefore he prays for allowing the petition by granting bail to the petitioners.