Rajesh Shetty vs The Police Inspector

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail for the offences punishable under

Sections 363, 302, 201 r/w Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent - police station Crime No.2/2017.

The brief facts of the prosecution case is, accused No.1 owed a sum of Rs.35 lakhs to the deceased Umesh Shetty and with an intention to

knock off the said amount, accused No.1 conspired with other accused to eliminate Umesh Shetty. On 28.12.2016 accused No.1 persuaded

Umesh Shetty go with him and took him in a Ritz car to an isolated place wherein other accused joined him and at about 6.30 p.m. they

strangulated Umesh Shetty with a veil. After confirming that he is dead, they destroyed his mobile phone, took his body in the backseat and

disposed off in a forest area. On the basis of the said complaint, case was registered against unknown persons and during investigation, petitioner

has been arrayed as accused No.2.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.2 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for the respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitted that accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 have been already granted bail by

this Court . There are no direct witnesses to the incident and the case of the prosecution rests on circumstantial evidence. Hence, by imposing

reasonable conditions, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader during the course of his arguments submitted that even though the case rests on

circumstantial evidence, but the materials collected during investigation prima facie at this stage show the involvement of petitioner and other

accused persons in the case. Hence, petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.

I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record. I have also perused the orders of this

Court dated 4.9.2017 passed in Crl.P.No.5416/2017 and dated 24.10.2017 passed in Crl.P.No.6665/2017 granting bail to accused Nos.1 and

4 respectively wherein the entire merits of the case were considered by this Court and ultimately, accused Nos.1 and 4 were granted bail.

Admittedly, there are no direct witnesses to the incident and the prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence. Hence, in view of the materials

placed on record and the contention of the petitioner herein that he is innocent and not involved in the alleged offences and there is a false

implication and also in view of his undertaking that he is ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by the Court, I am of the

opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of petitioner-accused No.2.

Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused No.2 is ordered to be released on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 302,

201 r/w Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent - police station Crime No.2/2017, subject to the following conditions:

i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned

Court.

ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.

iii. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.