AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Ananda, J.—The petitioners are arrayed as accused no. 11, 12 and 15 in Crime No. 50/2013 pending committal for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 302 r/w 149 IPC. Heard Sri. Amar Correa, learned counsel for petitioners and learned State Public Prosecutor for the State and I have been taken through investigation records, which would reveal: that petitioners and the deceased were residents of Vinoba Colony and Cement colony. There was gang rivalry. It is alleged that on 09.03.2013 at about 2.30 p.m., the petitioners and other accused formed into an unlawful assembly in furtherance of the common object of unlawful assembly, they assaulted the deceased Kumara with dangerous weapons and caused his death. They also assaulted the first informant namely Saravana (the brother of deceased).
As could be seen from the investigation records, there was enmity between the group led by petitioners and group led by the deceased. There are several eyewitnesses. Some of the eyewitnesses have named the petitioners as assailants. The statements of CW. 20, 21, 22 and 23 would reveal that these petitioners were also the members of unlawful assembly and they had assaulted the deceased and first informant.
Sri. Amar Correa, learned counsel for petitioners would submit that some of the accused have been released on bail by this court in Crl.P. 3978/2013 and Crl.P. 3921/2013. Therefore, petitioners are entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The learned State Public Prosecutor would submit that, statements of eyewitness would reveal that these petitioners had participated in commission of the murder of deceased Kumara.
The prosecution has invoked Section 149 IPC. Therefore, at this stage of the case, it is not necessary to consider the overt acts attributed to each of the accused. The presence of petitioners as members of unlawful assembly is sufficient to fasten vicarious criminal liability. The court while considering the bail application, need not make a detailed analysis of statements of eye witnesses. The statements of eyewitnesses would reveal that petitioners were the members of unlawful assembly, the common object of which was to commit the murder of deceased Kumara. The brother of deceased namely Saravana (first informant) has stated names of these petitioners in his further statement. Therefore, there is prima-facie case against petitioners.
The nature of offences, manner in which the offence was committed, place and time chosen by the accused to commit the offences would lead to an inference that if petitioners are released on bail, they are likely to intimidate or tamper with prosecution witnesses and they are like likely to flee away from justice. Therefore, the petition is dismissed.