Judgment 1. Petitioners are accused Nos.5 and 6 in a criminal case bearing Crime No.123/2014 on the file of Chintamani police Station, Chickballapura District. Offences alleged against them and other accused are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324, 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC. Since, the petitioners are in judicial custody for more than three months, they have approached this Court seeking the relief of regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 2. Learned Government Pleader has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that, sufficient prima-facie materials are forthcoming against these petitioners in forming an unlawful assembly along with accused Nos.1 to 4 and murdering one Nanjappa with deadly weapons like sickle, clubs and stone. It is also argued that in view of an earlier enimity, these accused persons formed an unlawful assembly at about 11.00 a.m. on 21.03.2014 at Doddaganjur Village, Chintamani taluk. It is argued that, earlier ill-will was in regard to dumping of compost in the Government land bearing Survey No.188. When accused Nos.1 to 4 and these petitioners tried to close the compost by putting mud and when the same was questioned by the wife of the complainant, all these accused persons formed an unlawful assembly by holding deadly weapons like clubs, stone and sickles and assaulted Smt.Vijayamma, when the father of the complainant i.e., the deceased Nanjappa tried to rescue her, accused persons assaulted Nanjappa. In view of severe injuries sustained by Nanjappa on his head, he was shifted to hospital, wherein he was declared dead. 4. Learned Government Pleader has further argued that this Court has dismissed the bail application filed by these petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C in Crl.P.No.3985/2014 dated 06.08.2014 and that this Court had made a specific observation about existence of prima-facie case in regard to the participation of these petitioners along with accused Nos.1 to 4 in murdering Nanjappa and assaulting CW.1 Sri G.N. Narayana Reddy and CW-2 Vijayamma. It is also argued that when bail application though filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C has been dismissed by making specific observation, this is not a fit case to consider the bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C on the ground of conclusion of investigation and filing of charge sheet. 5. These petitioners chose to surrender before the Investigating Officer and hence, they are in judicial custody. 5. These petitioners chose to surrender before the Investigating Officer and hence, they are in judicial custody. It is true that CWs.1 and 2 and CWs.9 and 10 are the eyewitnesses. Out of them, CWs.1 and 2 are the injured witnesses and they have given narration of the incident of murder of Nanjappa and they sustaining injuries. 6. As rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader that the presence of these petitioners at the scene of occurrence at that relevant point of time cannot be disbelieved at this stage. What exactly is the role of these petitioners and the remaining accused will have to be looked into, more particularly when bail application is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C, after conclusion of investigation. The statements of CW.1 Sri G.N. Narayana Reddy and CW.2 Smt. Vijayamma were recorded by the police on 24.03.2014 and 23.04.2014 respectively. Both statements disclose about earlier enimity between the accused persons and the complainant in regard to dumping of compost in the Government land. When Smt. Vijayamma questioned accused Nos.1 to 4 as to why they were dumping mud into the compost, accused K.R. Narayanaswamy assaulted her on head with chopper and accused G.C. Erappa Reddy, G.C. Jayarama Reddy and G.C. Ananda Reddy assaulted her as well her father-in-law with clubs on different parts of the body. It is further mentioned that Gangadhara and C. Narayanaswamy, the petitioners herein assaulted on the head of G.N. Narayana Reddy and on different parts of the body. When her father-in-law Nanjappa intervened to rescue Smt. Vijayamma, he was pushed down and both of them were dragged towards the vacant place in front of the house of Ganigara Veerabhadrappa. Then again accused G.C. Erappa Reddy, G.C. Jayarama Reddy and G.C. Ananda Reddy assaulted her father-in-law Nanjappa and also assaulted her husband with clubs. 8. Heard learned Senior Counsel Sri Ashok Haranahalli representing the petitioners. 9. What is stated by Smt. Vijayamma is that these petitioners assaulted her and her husband G.N. Narayana Reddy with stone and also assaulted her father-in-law Nanjappa with stone, by that time, Diry Narayanaswami, Bachayagari Srinivasa, Ramakrishnappa, N. Ramesh came there, pacified them and rescued them. 10. 8. Heard learned Senior Counsel Sri Ashok Haranahalli representing the petitioners. 9. What is stated by Smt. Vijayamma is that these petitioners assaulted her and her husband G.N. Narayana Reddy with stone and also assaulted her father-in-law Nanjappa with stone, by that time, Diry Narayanaswami, Bachayagari Srinivasa, Ramakrishnappa, N. Ramesh came there, pacified them and rescued them. 10. As could be seen from the statements of these witnesses, the main allegation is against accused No.1 K.R. Narayanaswamy who is stated to have assaulted Nanjappa with a chopper on his head, as is forthcoming from the medical evidence also. It is very moot point at this stage as to whether the assault so made by these petitioners on the head of the deceased did really become cause point to them. 11. It is true that CWs.1 and 2 had sustained few injuries as they are borne out from the wound certificate issued by the Government doctor. Admittedly, the injuries sustained by Smt. Vijayamma and her husband Sri G.N. Narayana Reddy are simple in nature. They have been discharged from the hospital after providing immediate medical treatment. In the light of the main allegation being made against accused Nos.1 to 4 dragging Nanjappa and two others to a vacant place in front of the house of Ganigara Veerabhadrappa and assaulting them with deadly weapons and in the light of these petitioners not assaulting the deceased Nanjappa either with clubs or sickle or chopper and in the light of these petitioners having surrendered before the police and having assisted the police in conducting investigation, they are entitled to be released on bail, subject to stringent conditions. Whatever observation is made in this order is only for the limited purpose of considering this bail of the petitioners and shall not influence the learned Sessions Judge dealing with the matter on merits. Hence, the apprehension of learned HCGP could be suitably met with by imposing proper conditions. 12. Whatever observation is made in this order is only for the limited purpose of considering this bail of the petitioners and shall not influence the learned Sessions Judge dealing with the matter on merits. Hence, the apprehension of learned HCGP could be suitably met with by imposing proper conditions. 12. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and bail is granted to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:- (i) Petitioners shall be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with one surety, for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court; (ii) Petitioners shall not hold out threats to the prosecution witnesses in any manner; (iii) Petitioners shall not involve themselves in any criminal activities; (iv) Petitioners shall appear on all dates of hearing before the trial Court, except under unavoidable circumstances; (v) Petitioners shall attend the respondent police station twice in a week on every Wednesday and Sunday between 9.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. without fail till all the materials witnesses are examined by the jurisdictional Sessions Court; (vi) Petitioners shall attend to the Magistrate Court till the case is committed to the Sessions Court and thereafter to Sessions Court till the entire trial is completed without fail; (vii) It is made clear that even slightest violation of any one of the conditions, would enable the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail granted by this Court.