Raveesh vs State Of Karnataka

H.P. Sandesh, J

This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner in Crime No.124/2017 of Byadarahalli Police Station,

Ramanagara for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the accused has committed the murder and in that process, he has caused injures

amounting to an attempt to commit murder and the prosecution examined 16 witnesses and an application is filed before the Trial Court for release of

the accused after examination of the 16 witnesses and the same was rejected. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody from last five years and the trial has not been completed and 16

witnesses have been examined and those witnesses have turned hostile. The Trial Court though discussed in the order, but dismissed the application on

the ground that material witnesses have categorically stated about the incident. The involvement of the accused can be gathered only after the

completion of the entire trial. The learned counsel submits that when the material witnesses, who have been examined, have not supported the case of

the prosecution, this Court can exercise the discretion.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State submits that though 16 witnesses have been examined,

out of that some of the witnesses have spoken about the incident on the said date and C.W.1 and C.W.4 have fully supported the case of the

prosecution and the matter has to be appreciated while considering the evidence available on record.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and on

perusal of the material available on record, no doubt, the petitioner is in custody from last five years, but the offence invoked is Sections 302 and 307

of IPC and when the witnesses have been examined and this Court sitting under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. cannot appreciate the evidence on record and

the Trial Court has to appreciate the evidence on record. On perusal of the order, the Trial Court has observed that the material witnesses have

categorically stated about the incident. Apart from that, the other reason given by the Trial Court is the involvement of the accused can be gathered

only after the completion of the entire trial. Admittedly, the entire trial has not been completed. When such being the factual aspects of the case, I am

of the opinion that it is not a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. considering the evidence on record before the Trial Court.

The Trial Court has to appreciate the material available on record and this Court cannot appreciate under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

ORDER

The petition is rejected. However, taking note of the fact that the petitioner is in custody from last five years, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of

the matter as early as possible not later than four months.