ORDER

Heard Sri. Advaveeshaiah B, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP.

2. Petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:

"Wherefore, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and order to release the petitioner on bail pertains to S.C.No.10008/2022 pending before the Hon'ble V Addl. District and Sessions Judge sitting at Tiptur, i.e. in crime No.148/2021 of Huliyar police, C.N.Halli Taluk, Tumkur Dist, for the offences punishable under Sec.448, 302 and 392 of IPC by allowing this petition in the interest of justice and equity."

3. Brief facts are as under:

The complaint came to be lodged with Huliyar Police, Chikkanaykanahalli Taluk, Tumkur District by Sri. Ramalingaiah, s/o. Siddaramaiah and the same was registered in crime No.148/2021 on 13.07.2021 for the offences punishable under Section 392, 448 and 302 IPC.

4. Gist of the complaint averments reveals that Karibasavaiah, younger brother of complainant was married to Lalithamma. After the death of Karibasavaiah, Lalithamma and her son were residing in the house and the son was mentally challenged. Lalithamma who is the wife of Karibasavaiah was eking out her livelihood from the agricultural income and also on the basis of pension. When the matter stood thus, on 13.07.2021 at about 8.30 a.m., the son of Lalithamma came near his house and informed that somebody entered the house in the night and was asking for gold ornaments and gagged the mouth of Lalithamma and assaulted and Lalithamma is now not in a position to speak and therefore sought for help. Immediately, complainant and others rushed to the house and went inside the house. On entering the house, all the household articles were scattered in the hall and body of Lalithamma was lying there without clothes and there was an injury on the face and they saw that mouth of Lalithamma was gagged with a cloth. Immediately, the daughter-in-law of the complainant removed the cloth from the mouth and on further observing that there was a saree tied to the neck region and they found that Lalithamma was no more.

5. Based on the complaint, the police registered the case against the unknown persons at the first instance for the aforesaid offences and the investigation was conducted.

6. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was apprehended and based on the voluntary statement, the investigation agency was able to seize the gold ornaments found on the body of Lalithamma from the custody of the accused and filed the charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences.

7. The attempt made by the petitioner seeking grant of bail was turned down by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumkur, sitting at Tiptur in Crl.Misc.No.10448/2021 by order dated 29.12.2021. Thereafter, the petitioner is before this Court.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Adaveeshaiah B reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, vehemently contended that since the charge sheet is filed and the case is based on circumstantial evidence, sought for grant of bail.

9. He pointed out that alleged eye witness who is the son of deceased Lalithamma being mentally challenged person, his witness cannot be believed and the entire case rests on circumstantial evidence and there is no proper identification of the petitioner in the incident and only on suspicion, the petitioner has been apprehended by the investigating agency and sought for grant of bail.

10. Per contra, learned HCGP opposes the grant of bail by contending that the investigating agency at the time of investigation, seized the gold ornaments found on the body of Lalithamma which has been identified by relatives of deceased which clearly establishes the nexus between the incident and the accused.

11. The case of the prosecution is supported by the eyewitness though the son of deceased is a mentally challenged person, his statement cannot be pressed aside in toto and sought for rejection of