The High Court granted bail to a petitioner absconding for employment in a murder charge sheet. Relying on no gunshot injuries and lack of direct evidence, bail was allowed on ₹50,000 with strict conditions against tampering.
The petitioner released on bail bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each for the like amount under specified conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BLAPL No.4030 of 2017
08.08.2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional St
anding Counsel for the State on the application under section 439 Cr.P.C. for release of the p
etitioner on bail who allegedly involved for the offence under Sections 147/148/294/323/325/32
6/307/302/506/149 of IPC read with Section 25(1)(a)(b) of Arms Act. The I.O. of the case is pr
esent.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although there is allegation against t
he present petitioner about firing from his revolver but no gun shot injury is found with the
deceased and the deceased died due to injury caused by the lathi and axe. He further submits t
hat there are co-accused persons in this case and the trial has already commenced. H
e further submits that the occurrence took place in 2012 but the petitioner for his earning ha
s gone to Surat resulting delay in causing his appearance. He further submits that there is
no recovery of any weapon of offence from the possession of the present petitioner, for which
lenient view may be taken to release the petitioner on bail on any condition as deemed just an
d proper. Learned Additional Standing Counsel opposing the prayer for bail submitted that if t
he petitioner is granted bail, he would abscond further and would cause delay of the trial of
the case but candidly submitted that no gunshot injury is there with the deceased.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, regard being
had to the facts and circumstances of the case including the statement of the witnesses and p
ost mortem report showing no gun shot injury on the body of the deceased and there being no di
rect material showing the exact role of the petitioner to cause death of the deceased, fact th
at the trial has already commenced and he has absconded for his earning, fact that charge shee
t in this case has been filed and the fact that the petitioner being a local person, there is
no chance of his absconding or influencing the witnesses, let the petitioner be released on b
ail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000.00 (rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties
each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned J.M.F.C., Kodala in G.R. Case No.
202/12(B) with the conditions that (i) The petitioner shall appear before the court in seisin
over the matter on each date of posting without being represented; (ii) he shall not tamper wi
th the
prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly; and (iii) he shall not commit any offence while
on bail.
Violation of any of the aforesaid terms shall entail cancellation of the bail.
Accordingly, the BLAPL is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail in a murder case involving multiple offences including unarmed death.
Whether conditions can be imposed to prevent absconding and interference with witnesses.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
The State
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court