ORDER : 1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his enlargement on bail in Crime No.72/2019 of respondent – Roza Police Station, Kalaburagi District, for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for brevity referred to as ‘IPC’). 2. The summary of the case of the prosecution is that one Saddam, who is said to be the elder brother of deceased Sharukh has lodged a complaint with the respondent – Police on 07.07.2019 at about 6.30 p.m. alleging that the deceased, who was his younger brother had no job or occupation, was passing time by residing with his elder sister Parveen Begum. He had a gang of friends including the present petitioner. The deceased had some monitory transactions with the present petitioner, in which connection there was some rivalry between them. The deceased was warned by the complainant on several times to discontinue his friendship with the present petitioner and his friends. That being so, on 07.07.2019, in the afternoon at about 4.00 p.m., the accused No.1/petitioner joined by his two friends came to the house of the complainant and took the deceased with them. Though the complainant questioned that the deceased could not go with them, but, the deceased stating that he had some talk to be made with them left the house on the said night and he did not return and also next day. Therefore, said Parveen also stated that the deceased had not gone to her house. On 07.07.2019, the complainant received a telephone call by his cousin brother Bade Shamshuddin, who informed him that Sharukh was found murdered near Paeen road, behind Beg Dargah. Rushing to the spot, the complainant noticed that his brother Sharukh was murdered and he suspecting the hands of the present petitioner and other two accused in the alleged commission of crime, the said crime was registered in Crime No.72/2019 for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. After completing the investigation, the police have filed the charge sheet for the same offence against all three accused. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner in his argument submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the alleged last seen theory. After completing the investigation, the police have filed the charge sheet for the same offence against all three accused. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner in his argument submitted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the alleged last seen theory. Except stating that recovery of knives said to have been made at the instance of the accused No.1/petitioner, the prosecution has not collected any material evidence to prove the alleged guilt of the petitioner. Even the alleged recovery is also full of doubts. 4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader who has filed his statement of objection to the petition has submitted that the deceased has sustained as many as twenty seven injuries and three knives were recovered at the instance of the present petitioner. Apart from the complainant, two more witnesses also have given their statement before the police about the last seen theory. In such circumstances, it is not a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on bail. 5. Admittedly, the entire case of the prosecution appears to have been based on the last seen theory. A perusal of the charge sheet at this stage would go to show that the prosecution has relied upon mainly on the say of the complainant and CWs.10 and 11, who appears to have stated that the deceased was lastly found in the company of the accused. However, the prosecution has claimed the recovery of three knives at the instance of the present petitioner. The postmortem report goes to show that the deceased had sustained as many as twenty seven injuries including several stab wounds on vital organs of the body. The doctor has opined that the death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of multiple stab injuries sustained associated with head injury. In such circumstances, though the case of the prosecution is based on the last seen theory, however, it cannot be ignored at this stage apart from the complainant, CWs.10 and 11 appears to have given their statement stating that they have seen the deceased lastly in the company of the accused on a motor bike. Even according to the prosecution, the weapon alleged to have been used in the commission of crime has been recovered at the instances of the accused No.1/petitioner. 6. Even according to the prosecution, the weapon alleged to have been used in the commission of crime has been recovered at the instances of the accused No.1/petitioner. 6. In such scenario, looking at the gravity of the offence and the multiple injuries, not less than twenty seven in number found on the body of the deceased, I am of the view that the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.