1. This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No. 1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in Crime No. 174/2021 of Jayapura Police Station, Mysuru registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B) read with Section 34 of IPC pending on the file of VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru in SC No. 139/2022.

2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are that the complainant, being the brother of the deceased, lodged a complaint by setting the law in motion. However, it is evident that the complaint is lodged against unknown persons for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. During the course of investigation, accused No. 2 was arrested and on the basis of his confession statement, accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 were also implicated.

3. As per the case of the prosecution, the deceased Nagaraju is the husband of accused No. 3. Accused Nos. 3 and 4 are sisters. It is also alleged that accused No. 3 was having illicit relationship with accused No. 1, the present petitioner, while accused No. 4 i.e., the sister of accused No. 3 was having illicit relationship with accused No. 2. It is alleged that the deceased warned accused No. 4 to discontinue the alleged illicit relationship and as such, accused Nos. 1 to 4 conspired with each other to eliminate the deceased. It is further alleged that on 06.10.2022 at 11.30 p.m., accused No. 4, by coercion, took the deceased to the place of occurrence on motor bike where accused Nos. 1 and 2 assaulted Nagaraju with deadly weapons and caused his death. In this regard, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. Perused the records.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence and there are no eyewitness to the incident. He would further contend that the present petitioner is implicated only at the instance of accused No. 2 who is already granted bail. He would further assert that the allegations made against accused Nos. 1 and 2 are similar and since accused No. 2 is granted bail, the present petitioner is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. Hence, he would seek for admitting the petitioner on regular bail.

6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader would seriously object the bail petition contending that there are material evidence in the form of recovery and would requests for rejection of the bail petition.

7. Having heard both sides and on perusal of the records, it is evident that the entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. Though CW-6 to CW-9 are said to be the witnesses, they are not the eyewitnesses, but are only circumstantial witnesses who have given their statement under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate. Their statement simply discloses the illicit relationship between accused No. 3 and the present petitioner-accused No. 1. The further allegation is regarding the recovery of the bloodstained clothes and the weapons used for commission of the offence. Merely because it is alleged that there are some recoveries, it cannot be concluded that the petitioner was directly involved in the commission of offence. Apart from this, accused No. 2 was granted bail by this Court in Crl.P. No. 6075/2022 against whom similar allegations are made. Hence, on the ground of parity, the petitioner is entitled for bail. Further investigation is concluded and charge sheet has been submitted. The petitioner is in custody for more than one year. The presence of the petitioner is no more required. Under these facts and circumstances, I do not find any impediment for admitting the petitioner for bail. The apprehension raised by the learned High Court Government Pleader can be meted out by imposing certain conditions. Hence, without expressing any opinion regarding merits of the case, the bail petition needs to be allowed and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

The petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused No. 1 is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 174/2021 of Jayapura Police Station, Mysuru registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 120(B), r/w Section 34 of IPC which is pending on the file of the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru in SC No. 139/2022, on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:-

i) He shall not indulge in any of the criminal activities;

ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly;

iii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission;

iv) He shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing, unless he is exempted by a specific order.

v) He shall co-operate for speedy disposal of the matter.