Judgment 1. Petitioners, who are arrayed as accused 3 and 5 in Crime No.37 of 2012 of Anavatti Police Station, Shimoga registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 324, 307, 504, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 have sought for grant of Anticipatory Bail. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that first petitioner and deceased Ramachandrappa are brothers. They have two more brothers by name Shivamurthy and Erappa, among whom Erappa has expired. The accused 1 and 2 in this case namely, Ashoka and Suresha are the sons of the first petitioner-Ajjappa. It is the case of the prosecution that all the brothers had divided the joint family properties including the lands amongst themselves and were enjoying the same separately that has fallen to their respective share. They were drawing water from a common well to their respective lands. In this connection, there were differences between the deceased on one hand and Ajjappa and his sons on the other hand. 3. Such being the case, it is the case of the prosecution that on 18-2-2012 at about 8.00 a.m. these two petitioners along with 4 others including sons of the first petitioner went near the house of the deceased Ramachandrappa, trespassed into the house and picked up quarrel with him in connection with drawing water from the well to their respective lands. Thereafter, the sons of the first petitioner namely, Ashoka and Suresha assaulted the deceased with sickle (kuda) and club on his legs and caused him severe injuries. It is further alleged that thereafter these two petitioners kicked the deceased and also instigated accused 1 and 2 to finish him off. In pursuance of the same, the son of the first petitioner assaulted the deceased again on his left foot and knee and the other accused by name Shivamurthappa and Shivaputhrappa assaulted the deceased with clubs and further caused severe injuries to which the deceased succumbed later. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the overtact attributed to these petitioners is that they have assaulted the deceased with hands and kicked him with legs. The fatal injuries according to the allegations in the complaint have been inflicted by the sons of the first petitioner. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the overtact attributed to these petitioners is that they have assaulted the deceased with hands and kicked him with legs. The fatal injuries according to the allegations in the complaint have been inflicted by the sons of the first petitioner. Further, all is not well between the first petitioner and the deceased in respect of drawing water from the well to their respective lands. The first petitioner is an aged man of 68 years. Having regard to the background, in which the occurrence has taken place and the overtact attributed to them, the petitioners be granted relief of Anticipatory Bail. 5. Per contra, learned Additional SPP vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners on the ground that at the instigation of the first petitioner, the deceased has been done to death at the hands of his sons. Apart from the same, these two petitioners have also assaulted the deceased with hands and kicked him with legs. Therefore, as the investigation is still pending and as the petitioners have not made themselves available to the police so far, they are not entitled to the relief of Anticipatory Bail. 6. The first petitioner is the brother of deceased Ramachandrappa. The material on record reveals that all is not well-between the two in respect of drawing water from the well to their respective lands. The overtact attributed to these petitioners is that they have assaulted the deceased with hands and kicked him with legs. Having regard to these overtacts attributed to these two petitioners and the family background in which the occurrence has taken place and taking into consideration that the first petitioner is an aged man of 68 years, I do no find any justification to decline the request of these two petitioners. 7. In the result and for the foregoing reasons, I proceed to pass the following: (i) Criminal petition is allowed. 7. In the result and for the foregoing reasons, I proceed to pass the following: (i) Criminal petition is allowed. (ii) Petitioners in the event of their arrest in Crime No.37 of 2012 of Anavatti Police Station, the said police are directed to release them on bail on each of them executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the said police, subject to the following conditions— (a) They shall appear before the Anavatti Police Station on or before 20-5-2012 for the purpose of their arrest and release; (b) They shall make themselves available to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purposes of investigation. (c) They shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.