The court dismissed a bail petition under IPCSections 302/307/307 in a four-murder case, rejecting claims of agency discrepancies and lack of overt acts, finding no valid reasons for release at this stage.
Criminal Petition dismissed; Petitioner to renew bail application after commitment to Court of Session.
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.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
CRIMINAL PETITION No.6069 of 2012
ORDER:
The petitioner/A7 is accused of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 452, 302, 307/149 IPC. The offence took place on 24.02.2012. This is a four murder case. Persons belonging to the same party who were divided into two groups fought with each other which resulted in four deaths and injuries to several others. It is pointed out by the petitioner’s counsel that A7’s name does not find place in FIR. But statements of witnesses and more particularly witness Nos.1 to 3 contain presence as well as participation of A7 in the offence. There appears to be some somersaults by the investigating agency, not only in investigation but also of the Investigating Officers. Originally plea of alibi of A7 was accepted by one Investigating Officer and his name was deleted. Subsequently investigation was entrusted to another Investigating Officer and he filed charge sheet by including A7 also as one of the accused. It is further pointed out by the senior counsel for the petitioner that no specific overt acts are attributed to A7 in the charge sheet against any of the deceased or injured. Charge sheet cannot have any independent entity apart from record of investigation, it being only a gist of investigation. As
pointed out earlier witness Nos.1 to 3 speak about complicity and participation of A7 in the case and in the offence proper by remaining at the scene. This Court previously in Criminal Petition No.4864 of 2012 by order dated 11.06.2012 dismissed bail plea of all the other accused except A.11. The petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2012. I do not find any valid reasons to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage in this ghostly offence.
In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. The petitioner is entitled to renew his bail application before this Court after the case is committed to the Court of Session.
____________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J.
22nd August 2012 Rns
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a quadruple murder case where the charge-sheet attributes presence and participation at the scene based on witness statements.
Whether the accused is entitled to renew his bail application pending commitment to the Court of Session.
A7
State
SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
