IMPORTANT POINT
The Court must see that justice is done to both parties.

ORDER

D.P. Hiremath, J. - Out of seventeen accused committed to the Court of Sessions at Mandya, who stand trial for offences under Sections 143,147,148,324,302 read with Section 149, I.P.C., six of them have been released on bail on grounds including medical grounds and others were rejected bail by the Sessions Court as well as this Court finding that there are reasonable grounds to believe that these accused persons are guilty of the offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the order of this Court rejecting bail to the accused - Petitioners is dated 16.1.1990. This Court referred to the part played by the accused in the commission of the offence and pointed out that the common object of unlawful assembly on the night of 16.8.1989 was to commit the murder of one Honnaiah in his house and had gone near his house armed with choppers, clubs and stones. When Honnaiah was not to be found, they assaulted seven persons near that house with these weapons and caused injuries to them. Thereafter, they went to the bus-stop expecting Honnaiah in a bus called Udayaranga which was to reach that place by 9.30 p.m., and when the bus arrived, A-7, A-10 and A-11 are alleged to have entered into it and when did not find Honnaiah but found one Gopaiah, he was assaulted there with choppers and clubs and dragged out of the bus. When one Chennamma a co-passenger attempted to rescue him, she was dragged out. When he was brought outside the bus, the other petitioners also assaulted him, as a result of which, he sustained 15 injuries, most of them were incised and cut wounds and the autopsy report discloses that they could have been caused by sharp edged weapons. He died on the way to the hospital. A complaint was filed the same right at about 2.30 a.m. by one Kambaiah against these, accused persons and a case came to be registered for the offences aforesaid. It was also stated that a complaint filed by A-17, who was released on anticipatory bail for offences under Sections 324 and 307, I.P.C. But, now it is stated at the Bar that presently on the complaint of A-17 the substantive offence under Section 326, I.P.C. with other alleged offences of unlawful assembly and rioting have been subject matter of the charge-sheet against some of the prosecution witnesses. This Court thus found from the nature of the allegations made and the common object of unlawful assembly that the petitioners herein are not entitled to bail.

2. The case has now been committed to the Court of Sessions by the committal order dated 1.1.1990 and so far it has not reached trial and charges were also not framed. For this reason invoking Article 21 of the Constitution, the petitioners have now approached this Court with this petition that they be released on bail-as it is not likely that the trial may not be concluded within reasonable time. In para-7 of the petition, it is stated that for more than one year and 8 months since the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions, the petitioners are in custody and petitioners 1 to 5 among them are in custody for a period of more than two years. They are not responsible for the delay. Having regard to the facts and circumstances including the pendency of other cases before the Sessions Court at Mandya, it is not reasonable to expect the trial of this case to be concluded in near future. The petitioners also refer to certain cases coming up before this Court wherein the accused were granted bail for the reason that the trial could not be concluded within a reasonable time.

3. In the objections filed by the State, it is stated that on merits fairly the bail petition has been rejected and with regard to the ground now urged having regard to the gravity of the offence alleged and the manner in which the petitioners have committed the murder of the deceased and accused grievous injuries to seven persons of the prosecution witnesses, the petitioners are not entitled to bail as there is likelihood of petitioners tampering w