Sadashiva vs State

N. Ananda, J.—The Petitioner is arrayed as accused No. 1 in Crime No. 109/2009 registered for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w. 34 of IPC. He has sought for bail.

Heard learned Counsel for Petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the State and I have been taken through the documents filed u/s 173(5) Code of Criminal Procedure which would reveal; that accused No. 1 had borrowed a sum of Rs. 35,000/- from deceased Shanthamma. Deceased was demanding first accused to return back money. On 24.11.2009, first accused secured deceased to Channarayapatna, falsely assuring that he would repay the amount. When deceased came to Channarayapatna to meet first accused, he took deceased to a nearby daba along with other accused. Deceased was made to consume some soft drink into which sleeping tablets had been mixed. When deceased became drowsy, she was taken in a goods auto rickshaw to the place of incident. The Petitioner strangled her to death. Thereafter, dead body was thrown into Hemavathi channel.

During investigation, accused was arrested and on the information volunteered by him, a gold chain and a pair of gold ear studs of deceased were recovered from shops of pawn brokers.

The learned Counsel for Petitioner referring to Criminal Petition No. 5029/2010 dated 27.10.2010 would submit that this Court had granted bail to accused No. 3 against whom, similar allegations are made.

After going through the order made in Criminal Petition No. 5029/2010, I find that this Court has not accepted the voluntary statement said to have been made by accused No. 3 and the recovery made pursuant to such statement on the ground that accused No. 1, who had been arrested on 17.12.2009 had given voluntary statement pursuant to which a gold chain and a pair of car studs of deceased were recovered from two pawn brokers of Channarayapatna. Therefore, the ground of parity is not available to Petitioner. Though the case is based upon circumstantial evidence, the circumstances brought on record would make out a prima facie case against Petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 of IPC. Therefore, petition cannot be released on bail. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.