NAVALAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.

(2.) The factual aspects of the case are that the petitioner/accused No.2 along with accused Nos.1 and 3 have committed the murder of the deceased. Since accused Nos.1 and 3 fell in love and the deceased opposed the love affairs between accused Nos.1 and 3, all the accused persons hatched a plan to eliminate the deceased and they had succeeded in committing the murder of the deceased and hence the petitioner and other two accused persons were indicted for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.

(3.) The contention of the petitioner is that, only the names of accused Nos.1 and 3 were found at the first instance while registering the case and the name of the petitioner herein has been indicted based on the statement of the co-accused that too particularly based on the statement of CW.8 and there was a delay of 10 days in filing the complaint. The alleged incident was taken place on 01.11.2017 and the complaint was registered on 10.11.2017 and the petitioner was arrested on 14.11.2017 and the charge sheet has already been filed and there is no need to keep the petitioner in custody. The entire case of the prosecution is based on the circumstantial evidence created to suit the theory of prosecution and the prosecution case is purely rested on alleged confession of the accused in police custody which is hit by Sections 25 and 27 of the Indian Evidence Act which is inadmissible.