IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 5 DAY OF APRIL, 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10444/2011 BETWEEN: Muthappa, S/o. Shivanappa Gothagi Age: 30 years, 0cc: Agriculture and Labour R/o. Tumarikoppa now at Malagitti Tq: Kushtagi, Dist. Koppal. PETITIONER (By Sri. S. S. Yadrami, Adv.) AND: The State of Karnataka By Hanamasagar Police Rep. by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench, Dharwad RESPONDENT (By Sri. Vinavak S. Kulkarni, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FiLED U/S 439 OF CRP.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN HANAMASAGAR P.S. NO.04/2011 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 302 AND 201 OF 1PC. THiS PETITION COMING ON POR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Heard the petitioner’s Counsel and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent- State in respect of bail sought by the petitioner, who is accused No.6 in Crime No.4/2011, in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC. 2. The prosecution case, in short, is that accused Ningappa is said to have married one Yellavva of Valmiki communit’ and this marriage of two different communities is not liked by the villagers arid, therefore, it was planned by the accused persons to take away the life of Ningappa. Accordingly, accused Nos, 1 to 4 found Ningappa in a school and they killed him by kicking to his testicles and other parts of the body and as Shankarappa witnessed the incident, said Shankarappa was also done to death by accused Nos. 1 to 4 in similar fashion. Thereafter, accused Nos. 1 to 4 requested the present petitioner to burrv the dead bodies and accordingly, this petitioner was involved in burying the dead bodies. 3. In the light of the aforesaid material collected by the investigating agency, the submission made by the petitioner’s counsel is that, this petitioner is not the person who is involved in the commission of murders of the aforementioned Ningappa and Shankarappa and all that is attributed to the petitioner is that he is involved in getting the dead bodies buried and digging up the earth, Therefore, the petitioner be released on bail. 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State also did not dispute the contents of the application. 4 5. Having taken note of the overt acts alleged and the main accused persons, who have committed the murders are said to be accused Nos. 1 to 4, and the only role assigned to this petitioner is said to be that he was requested by the main accused to help in burying the dead bodies. Taking note of the said material placed at this juncture, in my view, this petitioner can be released on bail by imposing conditions. 6. Hence, I pass the following order: The petition is allowed subject to the following conditions: i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.50,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court. ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not give threat to the prosecution witnesses in any manner. N iii) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the jurisdictional police station on every Saturday at any time between 10.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m. iv) The petitioner shall not involve himself in like offences in future. v) The petitioner shall not leave his place without the prior permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate. Sd! gab/ JUD