JUDGMENT K.Somashekar, J. - This is a petition filed by Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 in Marihal P.S. Cr.No.09/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 506, 120B read with Section 34 of the IPC. Since from the date of their arrest, the accused are in judicial custody. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks that they may be enlarged on regular bail for the grounds urged therein. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners who is appearing through video conferencing. But learned HCGP for the State is present before court physically in Principal Bench. 3. It transpires in the complaint filed by one Smt. Renuka Patreppa Mallannavar alleging that her husband Patreppa Mallannavar was an agriculturist and their lands were situated near Patri Basavanna Road. Further, the land of Vithal Shivarayappa Mallari was situated at a distance and since three to four years, her husband Patreppa Mallannavar was cultivating the land of Vithal Mallari along with his brother Basavaraj on a sharing basis. Both of them were residing as a joint family with their wife and children. A villager named Basanagouda Patil used to give them his tractor for their agricultural work. As on 19.01.2019, it is stated that the deceased Patreppa Mallannavar went to the said field for letting water to the crops. It is further alleged that the deceased Patreppa Mallannavar had made a telephonic call to his brother Basavaraj at about 7.00 p.m. and had told him that he was going to the field of Vithal Mallari along with the said Basanagouda Patil who owned a tractor, for ploughing his field with the tractor and that he would come home late. Later, the complainant was informed by her brother-in-law Basavaraj that deceased Patreppa Mallannavar would stay back at the field itself. Hence, the complainant and her family had dinner and slept that night. However, the deceased had not returned home even in the early morning of 20.01.2019. 4. Later, at about 8.30 a.m. on 20.01.2019, a person of the said village named Shivanand Adiveppa Mallannavar had telephoned to her brother-in-law Basavaraj and informed him that some unknown persons have killed Patreppa Mallannavar and Basanagouda Patil and that their dead bodies were lying in the land of Vithal Mallari and the tractor was parked near their bodies. 4. Later, at about 8.30 a.m. on 20.01.2019, a person of the said village named Shivanand Adiveppa Mallannavar had telephoned to her brother-in-law Basavaraj and informed him that some unknown persons have killed Patreppa Mallannavar and Basanagouda Patil and that their dead bodies were lying in the land of Vithal Mallari and the tractor was parked near their bodies. After her brother-in-law conveyed the said news, the complainant and all others went to the said field and saw their dead bodies and found that there were injuries on their neck and head and blood was also coming. Hence, she filed a complaint before the Marihal Police against unknown persons. 5. Subsequent to registration of the crime based upon the complaint filed by Smt. Renuka Patrappa Mallannavar, the crime came to be registered in Cr.No.9/2019 and investigation was taken up by the Investigating Agency who laid the charge-sheet against the petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2 that they have allegedly committed the murder of Patreppa Mallannavar and Basavanagouda Patil. Injuries were inflicted on their neck and also on the vital part of the head of her husband and blood was coming. Petitioners had some animosity with her husband Patreppa Mallannavar and Basanagouda Patil due to which the petitioners are said to have murdered them. But subsequent to registration of the crime against the accused, the I.O. has thoroughly investigated the case and conducted spot mahazar in the presence of Panch witnesses and so also recorded the statements of several witnesses. CW-12 to CW-16 are the eye-witnesses of the incident which is narrated in the substance of the charge-sheet. As per their statement, accused Nos.1 and 2 had assaulted Patreppa Mallannavar with means of an iron rod Jambia and koyta on his neck and also on the forehead. When Basanagouda got down from the tractor, the accused are said to have assaulted him as well on his neck and also on his shoulder part as well as on other parts of his body. The accused had also threatened CW-12 to CW-16 being the eye-witnesses to the incident that if they revealed the incident to anyone, they would face dire consequences. 6. The accused had also threatened CW-12 to CW-16 being the eye-witnesses to the incident that if they revealed the incident to anyone, they would face dire consequences. 6. The petitioners being arraigned as the accused have assaulted the deceased by means of deadly weapons only with an intention to eliminate the deceased by hatching a plan and entered into the land of R.S.No.125/2012 wherein the deceased was driving the tractor. When deceased Pattrappa Mallannavar had gone to the land along with Basanagouda, the accused persons have picked up a quarrel with the deceased persons and assaulted them with means of deadly weapons with an intention to eliminate the husband of the complainant as well as Basanagouda Patil. CW-12 to CW-16 have been cited in the chargesheet being the eye-witnesses account. They have stated in detail about the role made by these accused and also extending life threat to them. These are all the substances which find place in the charge-sheet laid by the I.O. against the accused. 7. Whereas the learned counsel for petitioners / accused has taken me through the information said to have been given by Smt. Renuka who is the wife of the deceased Pattareppa Mallannavar. But on 19.01.2019 late at night, the incident is said to have been committed by unknown persons and there is no direct overt act attributed against the person being arraigned as the accused to commit the murder as narrated in the substance of the charge-sheet. But as per the prosecution case, there are five eye-witnesses. If really these five alleged eye-witnesses had witnessed the incident, they would have reported the incident before the police to take action against the accused by registering the crime. But criminal law set into motion only on filing of a complaint by Smt. Renuka being the wife of Pattreppa Mallannavar with an oblique motive just to give harassment to the accused persons. But at the first instance when the accused came to the scene of crime with an intention to quarrel with the deceased person, at that time there was no assault with any weapons. But second time, it is alleged that they were armed with deadly weapons. But these material facts being vital in nature for consideration that entire case can be set up against the accused to suit the parties. But second time, it is alleged that they were armed with deadly weapons. But these material facts being vital in nature for consideration that entire case can be set up against the accused to suit the parties. The second limb of the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the accused is that the accused are in judicial custody since from the date of their arrest and if the accused are kept behind bars for a longer period, certainly their family members would lose their bread winners. Therefore, the said fact requires to be considered apart from other grounds such that the accused are ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this court while granting bail to them. These are all the grounds as urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner emphatically and seeking for grant of regular bail, even though it is a successive bail petition filed by these accused nos.1 and 2. 8. On the other hand, learned HCGP for the State has taken me through the allegations made in the complaint filed by Smt. Renuka who is none other than the wife of the deceased Pattreppa Mallannavar. Patreppa Mallannavar was an agriculturist and their lands were situated near Patri Basavanna Road. Further, the land of Vithal Shivarayappa Mallari was situated at a distance and since three to four years, her husband Patreppa Mallannavar was cultivating the land of Vithal Mallari along with his brother Basavaraj on a sharing basis. As on 19.01.2019, deceased Patreppa Mallannavar went to the said field for letting water to the crops and he had made a telephonic call to his brother Basavaraj at about 7.00 p.m. and had told him that he was going to the field of Vithal Mallari along with the said Basanagouda Patil who owned a tractor, for ploughing his field with the tractor and that he would come home late. Later at about 8.30 a.m. on 20.01.2019, the complainant got information that some unknown persons have killed Patreppa Mallannavar and Basanagouda Patil and that their dead bodies were lying in the land of Vithal Mallari and the tractor was parked near their bodies. Some persons having some ill-will or animosity with the complainant s husband had committed the murder. Later at about 8.30 a.m. on 20.01.2019, the complainant got information that some unknown persons have killed Patreppa Mallannavar and Basanagouda Patil and that their dead bodies were lying in the land of Vithal Mallari and the tractor was parked near their bodies. Some persons having some ill-will or animosity with the complainant s husband had committed the murder. Hence, based upon her complaint, the case in Cr.No.9/2019 of Marihal P.S. came to be registered for offences under Sections 302, 506, 120B of the IPC. The accused persons have committed the murder of the deceased with means of Jambia and Koyata, which are dangerous weapons. That itself indicates that the accused had an intention to eliminate the deceased. Further, the Post Mortem report indicates that deceased Basanagouda suffered a chop wound over upper part of neck, a muscle deep chop wound, a cut lacerated wound across outer angle of left eye, whole of left ear irregularly chopped, muscle deep puncture wounds, etc. Further, as per the Post Mortem report of deceased Patreppa Mallannavar, he had suffered chop wound over right side neck, a muscle deep incised wound, a horizontal chop wound over middle of neck, a bore deep cut lacerated wound, multiple superficial incised wounds over forehead, nose, left cheek, and multiple small contusions over face and neck etc. Further, the Doctor had opined that the said injuries were inflicted by sharp to moderately sharp heavy cutting weapon. The aforesaid injuries inflicted over the person of the deceased itself indicates that the persons being the accused had intention to eliminate the deceased by hatching a criminal conspiracy. They had picked up a quarrel with the deceased and assaulted them with means of dangerous weapons such as iron rod and jambia and committed murder mercilessly. If the accused are supposed to be released on bail, certainly there would be adverse impact on the society whereby they have committed murder of two persons and it is to be termed as a double murder. Therefore, the accused do not deserve to be granted regular bail in this successive bail petition, as there is no change in circumstances. These are all the contentions taken by the learned HCGP for the State and seeking for dismissal of the bail petition filed by the accused. 9. Therefore, the accused do not deserve to be granted regular bail in this successive bail petition, as there is no change in circumstances. These are all the contentions taken by the learned HCGP for the State and seeking for dismissal of the bail petition filed by the accused. 9. It is in this context of the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the petitioners in this successive bail petition and so also the counter made by the learned HCGP for the State relating to the case in Cr.No.9/2019, whereby the I.O. has thoroughly investigated the case and laid a charge-sheet against the accused in S.C.No.284/2019. But on the fateful day on 19.01.2019 the deceased Pattreppa Mallannavar who is none other than the husband of the complainant Renuka had been to the land of Vithal Mallari wherein that land had been cultivated by them on crop sharing basis. But on 19.01.2019 at around 22 hours in the night, the accused had been to the scene of crime as according to the criminal conspiracy hatched by them to eliminate the deceased. Hence, they had entered into the land of R.S.No.125/2012 wherein the deceased was driving the tractor in the scene of crime on the land. But Accused Nos.1 and 2 have assaulted with means of an iron rod and jambia by choosing the vital part of his neck and also on the forehead. When Basavanagouda got down from the tractor, the accused had assaulted him on the vital part. Hence, it is seen that accused have committed double murder as already stated and they have inflicted injuries over the person of the deceased, which is reflected in the PM report. This is a successive petition filed by the accused seeking regular bail. There was a motive behind committing the murder of the deceased in order to eliminate them. The factors and also background for consideration of the bail petition are whether the accused are deserving for grant of bail in respect of similar offences and whether they would be available for facing of trial and also as to whether they would flee from the place in case granting bail. But in the instant case, these accused have committed double murder by inflicting injuries over the person of the deceased as reflected in the PM report. But in the instant case, these accused have committed double murder by inflicting injuries over the person of the deceased as reflected in the PM report. Therefore, if the accused are supposed to be released on bail, certainly there shall be an adverse impact on the society and also for the eye-witnesses CW-12 to CW-16. The entire case even though revolves around these witnesses, in order to arrive at a conclusion, but the statement of these witnesses is required to be tested by the prosecution and it has to be subjected to crossexamination on the part of the defence. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that there are no strong prima facie materials against the petitioners who committed the alleged offences. The materials collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation are enough material to proceed with the case to lay the charge-sheet and also enough material for the accused to face trial. Therefore, learned HCGP s submission that if the accused are supposed to be released on bail, they would certainly come in the way of the prosecution, cannot be ruled out in view of the involvement of the accused and they having committed double murder carrying vengeance against the deceased. In view of the aforesaid reasons, I am of the considered opinion that the accused do not deserve to be released on bail in this successive bail petition. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.