This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying

to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in respect of Crime

No.227/2021 registered by the Madanayakanahally

Police

Station, Bengaluru District, for the offences punishable under

Sections143, 147, 148, 504, 506, 341, 447, 302, 120(B) R/w

Section 149 of IPC.

2.

The factual matrix of the case is that due to civil

dispute between the parties, this petitioner along with other

accused persons trespassed the property bearing survey No.24/1

on 22.04.2021 at around 8.30 a.m near the house of

complainant and wrongfully restrained the victim and held him

and also prevented him not to scream at the spot and this

petitioner along with accused No.3 inflicted injury with dragon on

neck, forehead and all over the body and other accused persons

also inflicted injuries. As a result of the assault, the victim

3

succumbed to the injuries. The accused persons have committed

murder and left the spot in the car.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 have already grated bail on the ground

that they were not present at the spot and also one of the

accused was switched on the car and assisted the other accused

person to flee away from the place of occurrence and no specific

allegation is made against these petitioners. Investigation is

completed and charge sheet has been filed. Hence, the

petitioners are entitled for bail.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that

prosecution mainly relies upon the statement of witness of

CWs.1 to 3 and their statements are contradictory to each other

with regard to witnessing the incident. Learned counsel also

submits that in terms of mahazar drawn in the place of

occurrence, the distance is about 400 feet. When such being the

case, witnessing the incident prima facie cannot be believed.

Hence, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

4

5.

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for the respondent-State would submit that cause of

death is on account of multiple injuries sustained by the victim

and apart from that CWs.1 to 3 are eye witnesses and there is a

direct evidence against the petitioner particularly the allegation

against this petitioner is that he inflicted injuries with dragon on

the vital part of the neck and post mortem report corroborates

allegation made against this petitioner. Hence, petitioner is not

entitled for bail.

6.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and also learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for the State and having taken note also on perusal of

material available on record it is seen that postmortem report is

very clear that death is on account of multiple injuries sustained

by the victim and apart from that CWs.1 to 3 are eye witnesses

to the incident and the very contention of the learned counsel for

the petitioner that there are material contradictions in the

statement of witnesses but the same cannot be considered at

the time of considering the bail petition and the same is matter

5

of trial. It is also not in dispute that there is civil dispute between

the parties and suit is also pending before the Court and it is

barbaric act of committing murder by inflicting injuries with

dragon that too on vital part of the body and there were 13

external injuries and the death was due to shock and

hemorrhage and due to multiple injuries victim succumbed to

the same. Hence, it is not a fit case to exercise discretion in

favour of the petitioner. The contention of the learned counsel

for the petitioner that accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 have already

granted bail but the same cannot come to aid of the petitioner

herein since the specific overt acts allegation is made against

this petitioner and the reasoning assigned in respect of accused

Nos.5, 6 and 7 are different for the reasons that they were not

at the spot and only helped the other accused to flee away from

the spot.

7.

In view of the discussions made above, the petition

is rejected.