IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 22%? DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009 BEFORE ITHE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GCWDA CRIMINAL PETITION NG, 7889/2009 BETWEEN: AND: Sanjeev S/o. Tirakappa Adagal, Age. 30 years, Oce. Agriculty R/o. Hole It 1q. Shirahatti, Dist. Gadag. PETITIONER (By Sri. K.L, Patil, Adv.) The State of Karnataka, Py Mundargi P.S. Rep. By SPP High Court of Karnataka, Cireuit Bench, Dharwad. .. RESPONDENT (By Sri. P.H. Gotkhindi, H.C.G.P.) This CrLP is filed U/S. 439 CR.P.C. by the Advocate for the petitioner praying to allow the criminal petition and to enlarge petitioner on regular bail in connection with Mundargi P.S. Crime No. 221/2008 in C.C. No. 74/2009pending on the file of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & J.M.F.C Mundargi, which is charge sheeted for the offence punishable U/sec. 447, 302, 504, 109 R/w. 34 of LP.C. and to grant such other relief. This Crl.P is coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following: ORDER The petitioner, wko is in judicial custody after his arrest during investigation in Mundargi P.S. Crime No. 221/2008, now havitig C.C, NO. 74/2009, registered for the offences punishable U/sec. 447, 302, 504, 109 R/w. 34 LP.C., wherein he has. been arrayed as accused No.1, has filed this petition U/sec. 439.Cr.P.C. seeking enlargement on bail. 2. The petitioner had filed a petition for bail U/sec. 439 Cr.P.C. in the Court of District & Sessions Judge at Gadag. The petition having been opposed by the prosecution/State, after consideration was rejected by the Sessions Judge, Gadag vide order dtd. 25/07/2009.3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned H,.C.G.P. for the respondent. 4. Sri. K.L. Patil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by taking me through the averments made in the petition and the charge sheet materials of C.C. No. 74/2009, submitted that, the investigation is faulty, the materials collected during investigation ana the charge sheet filed, have not made out a prima-facie case against the petitioner, in respect of the offence for which he has been charge sheeted. It was contended. that, the respondent has unnecessarily implicated the petitioner in the alleged crime. It was submitted that, the petitioner is innocent and a peace loving citizer, and is no wey concerned with the alleged crime, in question. Since, he is a permanent resident of Hole-Itagi village, having immovable property, he may be eniarged on bail that to by subjecting him to appropriate conditions, aiso considering the fact that, the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has already been filed. 5. Sti. P.H. Gotkhindi, learned H.C.G.P. appearing for the respondent contended that, after the crime was L