BUKKE RANUKA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are A1, A2 and A4 in Crime No.50 of 2004 of P.S.K.V. Pally in Chittoor District under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC). As per the First Information Report given by the father of one Eswar Naik, the latter was murdered by Al to A4 as the deceased refused to allow Renuka (A1) to go to Quwait which resulted in a quarrel between them. It was also alleged that after the deceased refused the request of Al to go to Quwait she lodged a complaint in K.V. Pally Police Station and left the matrimonial home and was living in the house of A2 to A4. There was a mediation by relatives. As per the advice of the mediators Eswar Naik agreed to stay for two days with parents-in-law, but while the complainant was in his agricultural fields he came to know that Eshwar Naik was murdered.

(2.) The complaint was given on 25.10.2004 and the police registered a crime and took up the investigation. A1 to A4 were arrested on 19.11.2004 and sent to remand for judicial custody. They moved the Court of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Tirupathi by filing Crl.M.P.No.1838 of 2004 for bail. The said Court dismissed the petition on 27.12.2004 taking a view that the accusations levelled against A1 to A4 are well-founded and pending investigation, they cannot be released on bail. A1 to A4 thereafter filed Criminal Petition No.87 of 2005 before this Court on 10.1.2005 for bail. By an order dated 31.1.2005 this Court dismissed the petition for bail having regard to the nature of accusations levelled against the petitioners and also noticing the fact that investigation is in progress. This Court further gave liberty to A1 to A4 to renew their request for bail after completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet.

(3.) The police could not complete the investigation and file charge-sheet within 90 days. Therefore, A1 to A4 again moved Crl.M.P.No.279 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Tirupathi for bail. By an order dated 23.2.2005 the learned III Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the petition again having regard to the observations made by this Court that the accused may renew their request after filing of the charge-sheet. Aggrieved by the same, A1, A2 and A4 filed the present petition for bail.