ORDER

The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 have filed this successive bail petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for enlarging them on bail in Bannur Police Station in Crime No.117/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 307 and 114 read with Section 34 of IPC.

2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are that on 29.04.2022 at about 8.30 p.m. the complainant had been to Balaji Bar and Restaurant along with his two friends. It is alleged that at that time the present petitioners along with other two persons entered the bar and restaurant and with prior animosity attacked the complainant. It is also alleged that the complainant was assaulted by long on his head and other parts of the body and they dragged him out and again assaulted with broken glass piece and kicked him indiscriminately, as a result he has suffered grievous injuries. Later on he was shifted to hospital and a complaint was lodged. On the basis of the complaint, crime came to be registered. After completion of investigation, Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet also. Petitioners were arrested and remanded to Judicial custody.

3. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.

Perused the records.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the alleged incident is said to have taken place at 8.30 p.m. and crime came to be registered in the night hours. The petitioners were arrested on 01.05.2022 and since then they are in custody. It is also alleged that investigation is concluded and charge sheet has been laid down and there is inordinate delay in recording the statement of the witnesses which is not properly explained. He would contend that in view of the submission of the charge sheet, the presence of the petitioners is no more required and he has also produced certain documents to show that complainant himself is a rowdy sheeter and hence, he would contend for admitting the petitioner on bail subject to any of the conditions deemed fit by this Court.

5. Per contra learned HCGP would contend that the complainant has suffered six injuries and injury 1 to 5 are grievous in nature. He would also contend that CWs 2 to 5 are eye witnesses and accused is also involved in Bannur Police Station in Crime No.40/2015 and hence, he would contend that they are habitual offenders and in case they are enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of tampering the prosecution witnesses and jumping on bail. Hence, he would seek for rejection of the bail petition.

6. Having heard the arguments and perusing the records, the allegations of the prosecution is that the petitioners have attacked the complainant on head and other parts of the body by long. The wound certificate produced disclose that the complainant has suffered grievous injuries on his left and right hands, left shoulder, left leg and occipital region. The wound certificate further disclose that injuries at Sl.Nos.1 to 5 are grievous in nature while the lacerated wound on right arm is said to be simple in nature. The alleged incident is said to have taken place in the bar and further the complainant was alleged to have dragged out of the bar and was assaulted. The complainant is now discharged from the hospital. Even during the disposal of the earlier bail petition also it is evident that charge sheet was laid down and Court has considered the submission of the charge sheet. Now the arguments are that the complainant himself is a rowdy sheeter. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioners has produced certain documents to show that the complainant is involved in number of cases. But the rowdy sheeter document produced is pertaining to one Chinni @ Dayananda s/o Puttasiddaiah. But admittedly in the instant case, the complainant is Dayananda s/o Srinivasaiah and the rowdy sheeter produced disclose the different fathers name. Apart from that he has also produced certain other documents