MAHEBOOB v. THE STATE THROUGH YADGIR

(BY SRI USTAD SADATH HUSSAIN, ADV.) AND: THE STATE THROUGH YADGIR TOWN P.S. DIST: YADAGIR. (BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA K. BABSHETFY) PETITIONER ,. .RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.96/2011 (S.C. NO.64/2011) THE RESPONDENT POLICE OF TOWN POLICE STATION, YADAGIR, WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 302 OF IPC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS ThIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING 2 ORDER Petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 96/2011 registered on the file of respondent-police now pending in S.C. No. 64/2011 on the file of Prl. District and Sessions Judge. Yadgiri the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner married the deceased 12 years prior to the incident which took place on 10.08.2008 at 01.00 p.m. at Gunj area of Yadgir town. After the marriage petitioner was residing with his wife at Chinnakar Village in Yadgir District and 7 years prior to the incident they shifted to Yadgir town, where the petitioner was working as an auto driver and the deceased was doing tailoring work for their livelihood. He submits that the dead body of the deceased was found in Gunj area which is a busy locality and several people will be moving there, Petitioner has not committed any offence and 3 he is falsely implicated at the instance of the brother of the deceased. Therefore, he prays for allowing the petition and granting bail to the petitioner.

Whereas, the learned HCGP appearing for respondent-State submits that the statement of CW2 1, who is son of the deceased clearly shows the motive behind the commission of offence by the accused-petitioner. Therefore, he prays for rejection of the bail petition.

According to the case of the prosecution. petitioner married the deceased 12 years prior to the incident and after marriage they were residing at Chinnakar village in Yadgir District for few years and 7 years prior to the incident they shifted their family to Yadigir town for eking out their livelihood and the petitioner was carrying out the profession by working as an auto rickshaw driver and the deceased was doing tailoring work to earn their bread. In the complaint lodged by the brother of the deceased, it, is alleged that the petitioner was harassing the deceased, suspecting that she 4 has illicit contact with other male persons. During the investigation material collected by the police prima facie shows the commission of offence by the petitioner. The Sessions Judge considering the same has rejected the bail petition of the petitioner.

I have gone through the chargesheet and statements of the chargesheeted witnesses and also the order passed by the Sessions Judge, I do not find any changed circumstances to grant bail in favour of the petitioner. Hence, the petition is hereby rejected. Sd/ JUDGE Sbs*