Butalasidda vs State

K.N. Phaneendra, J.—The petitioner is arrayed as accused No. 1 in C.C. No. 60/2015 on the file of the JMFC Muddebihal. The Muddebihal police have investigated the case in Crime No. 264/2014 against the petitioner and others for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 of IPC and laid the charge sheet.

It is the case of the prosecution as could be seen from the charge sheet papers that a person by name Muttanna S/o. Siddappa lodged a complaint stating that on 02.11.2014 in the morning when he had been to his land he came to know that somebody''s dead body was there in the canal near his land then they went near the said canal situated near the land of one Yamanappa Gonal. They observed the dead body of a person aged 25-30 years. On the basis of said information to the police by Muttanna the investigation began. During the course of investigation it disclosed that daughter of accused Nos. 1 and 2 by name Roopa and deceased Prakash were loving each other prior to the marriage of Roopa. The said Roopa was given in marriage to one Ramesh of Itagi village. It is alleged that even after the marriage of Roopa the said Prakash continued his illicit intimacy with Roopa. In this background on 28.07.2014 the deceased Prakash went to the house of Roopa under the guise of giving invitation and he stayed there in the house of Roopa. The accused Nos. 1 and 2 went to the house of Roopa and on that day and they were angry with the said Prakash for the reason that he continued illicit relationship with Roopa even after her marriage and on that day they took him along with them and thereafter his dead body was found in the canal.

During the course of investigation the prosecution relied upon that accused Nos. 1/petitioner herein and another took the deceased along with them and thereafter deceased found dead in the canal. Another circumstance is extra judicial confession of the accused persons before some of the witnesses that too before the police, in my opinion, the accused/petitioner arrested since five and two months he has been in judicial custody. The entire case revolves around the two circumstances. However, at this stage they create strong suspicion but suspicion has to be removed during the course of trial by proving the case beyond reasonable doubt. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances of the case and accused being in judicial custody for more than five months and no previous incident alleged against the petitioner and is having deep roots in the society and he is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, I am of the opinion, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail when the charge sheet has already been filed.

Hence, I pass the following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with C.C. No. 60/2015 pending on the file of the JMFC, Muddebihal for the offences Punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 of IPC subject to following conditions:

"i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court/trial Court as the case may be.

ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all the future hearing dates unless prevented by any genuine cause.

iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission, till the disposal of the case on merits."