SYED MEHABOOB PASHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 302 and 201, 120-B r/w Section 149 of IPC registered in respondent - police station Crime No.100/2017.

(2.) Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners during the course of his arguments submitted that there are no eyewitnesses to the incident. The case of the prosecution rests on circumstantial evidence. He has submitted that the only circumstance according to the prosecution case is that the wife of Ayub Khan has stated that on 20.5.2017 all the accused Nos.1 to 6 came to the house and took the deceased along with them stating that they wanted to have discussion regarding real estate business. Except this material, there is no other material to show the involvement of the petitioners in committing the alleged offences. He has submitted that even the medical evidence and the opinion of the doctor regarding age of injuries shows that the present petitioners are not involved in committing the alleged offences. He has submitted that accused Nos.4 to 7 have been already granted bail. Now investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioners may be enlarged on bail. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioners also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2005(1) Crimes 113(SC) in case of Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu.