Cr.M.P.(M) No. 263 of 2009. 16.4.2009 Present: Ms. Ambika Kotwal vice counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Vikas Rathore, Dy.A.G. for the respondent. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R. No. 182 of 2008 dated 9.10.2008 registered at Police Station, Bhuntar, District Kullu, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Ms. Ambika Kotwal, Advocate submits that the petitioner is in custody since 9.10.2008. She further submits that her client is a permanent resident of Mandi District. The investigation in the case is complete and the challan has been put up in the Court. The recoveries have already been effected and taken in possession by the police. The petitioner at no juncture was associated in the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in the case. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application. He submits that the application filed before the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi has already been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Mandi on 19.3.2009. In case the petitioner is released on bail, in that eventuality, there is every likelihood of his tampering the evidence and terrorizing the witnesses. I have heard the parties and have perused the police record. The incident is dated 8.10.2008. It is in the statements of the prosecution witnesses that the petitioner Ramesh Kumar had caught hold of the neck of deceased Hem Raj and pressed the neck to the down side and thereafter, co-accused Hans Raj alias Vikky inflicted a knife blow to the deceased who lateron fell on the road. The petitioner was riding motor cycle and has also given beatings to the complainant and other persons. They fled the spot on the motor cycle. The recoveries have been effected under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act at the instance of the petitioner and co-accused Hans Raj. The petitioner has produced the blood stained clothes. Earlier application filed by the accused before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Mandi has been rejected by a speaking order. It is not a fit case where the petitioner can be permitted to be enlarged on bail. There is possibility of the petitioner tampering with the evidence and terrorizing the complainant and other witnesses. The petitioner has not made out a case for his release on bail. Accordingly, there is no merit in this application and the same is dismissed. The observations made in this order are for the disposal of this application and the same shall not be treated as an expression or opinion on the merits of the case. (Rajiv Sharma), J. April 16, 2009. (cr)