The court grants bail based on the petitioners' lack of prior criminal records and the protracted timeline of the trial process, emphasizing the necessity for a fair trial without undue detention.

ORDER :

(S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J.)

Accused Nos.1 to 3 in S.C.No.5015/2025 pending before the Court of IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga (sitting at Bhadravathi) arising out of Crime.No.139/2024 registered by Paper Town Police Station, Shivamogga District for the offences punishable under Sections 103 (1), 61(2)(a) R/w 3(5) of BNS , 2023 are before this Court in these three petitions filed under Section 483 of BNS S, 2023 seeking regular bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. FIR in Crime.No.139/2024 was registered by Paper Town Police Station, Shivamogga District initially for the offence punishable under Section 103 R/w 3(5) of BNS , 2023 against the petitioners herein on the basis of first information dated 12.12.2024 submitted by Sri Krishna S/o Sundara. During the course of investigation, the petitioners herein who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 3 in the FIR were arrested on 14.12.2024 and subsequently they were remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences.

4. The bail application filed by the petitioners before the jurisdictional Sessions in S.C.No.5015/2025 was rejected. Therefore, they are before this Court.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners having reiterated the grounds urged in the petitions submits that entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. The petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents. FIR has been registered against accused based on the confession statement of accused No.2. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petitions.

6. Per contra, the learned HCGP has opposed the bail application. She submits that there are sufficient materials to connect the petitioners to the alleged crime. Accordingly, she prays to dismiss the petitions.

7. In the first information submitted by Sri Krishna S/o Sundar on 12.12.2024, he has stated that, on 12.12.2024 at about 11.30 a.m, accused No.2-Sudeep has confessed that he and other accused persons had committed the murder of Parashurama @ Ramesh, who was the brother-in-law of accused No.1. It is in this background, FIR was initially registered against Mahantesh and two others. During the course of investigation, accused Nos.1 to 3 were arrested on 14.12.2024 and after completing investigation, charge sheet has been filed against them for the aforesaid offences.

8. The entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. In the charge sheet it is alleged that, accused No.1, had a ill-will against the deceased Parashurama, who was the brother-in-law of accused No.1, for the reason that Parashurama was in a habit of abusing and assaulting his family members.

9. In the charge sheet it is alleged that, accused No.1 also had an eye on the property of deceased and it is in this background, he allegedly had conspired with accused Nos.2 and 3 to commit the murder of his brother- in-law Parashurama. In furtherance of such conspiracy on 09.12.2024, accused Nos.2 and 3 allegedly had taken Parashurama along with them and made him consume alcohol and thereafter at about 8.30 p.m, they had committed his murder by strangulating his neck using a towel. Subsequently, they had disposed of the dead body of deceased Parashurama into the water channel and had returned home.

10. The postmortem of the dead body was performed in the present case on 13.12.2024 and accused persons were arrested in the present case on 14.12.2024. Therefore, it is very clear that, even before the accused were arrested, dead body of t