JITESHKUMAR PRAHLADBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application is filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant for regular bail in connection with an FIR being C.R.No.I-83 of 2019 dtd. 18/05/2019 registered with Pandesara Police Station, Surat City, District: Surat City for the offences under Ss. 302 , 201 , 203 , 120(B) and 54 of IPC and Sec. 135(1) of GP Act.

(2.) The facts of the present application is that the present applicant is the son of the victim father who was murdered. It is alleged that the present applicant hatched the conspiracy with other co-accused. He had left his father to a particular place where other co-accused were waiting and thereafter they killed his father and buried in the ground and the said dead body was found from the narrated spot and was identified by the brother of the deceased.

(3.) Mr. S.V Raju, learned senior counsel appearing with Mr. Barot , learned advocate for the applicant submits that the present applicant had brought his father at the place of incident. It is alleged that the present applicant had purchased a saw and a garden hoe but it is not incriminated in the offence.. He has submitted that the other evidence against the present applicant are hear-say evidence. He has admitted that though there is confession, however, the said confession is hit by Sec. 25 of the Evidence Act. It is further submitted that the applicant is in custody since 13 months and no TI parade is held. There is no reason to kill his father. He has submitted that the victim had quarrel with other co-accused and thereby incident had taken place. The other relatives have falsely roped the present applicant in the offence. He has submitted that the case is based upon circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence which can connect the present applicant in the alleged offence.