ORDER : This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail in Crime No.171/2020 of Murgod Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 302, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution is that Smt. Shridevi w/o Kareppa Pujer has filed the complaint and in the said complaint she has stated that she is resident of Benakatti village. On 30.07.2020, the Murgod police called her to the Police Station. It is alleged that on 28.02.2020, the complainant has reported that during 10.00 p.m. on 26.02.2020 to 06.00 a.m. on 27.02.2020 her husband Kareppa Dundappa Pujer, aged 40 years, was found lying in the gutter in front of the hosue of one Dundappa Gulappa Pujer. Kareppa was admitted at Belagavi District Hospital but he expired on 27.02.2020 at 09.45 p.m. A case was registered by Murgod Police in U.D.No.7/2020 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. It is further alleged that on 30.07.2020, the Murgod police called the complainant and informed that her husband has died due to injury on the head as per the postmortem report and asked the complainant whether she has any information about the injury. It is further alleged that Smt. Ratnavva, the sister-in-law of the deceased had left the house of her husband and was staying in the house of the complainant. The husband of the complainant used to raise quarrel with Ratnavva/accused No.5 telling her to vacate the house as he wants to stay with his family. For the said reason, accused No.5/Ratnavva and her sister's son-Rudrappa Heggannavar were angry on the husband of the complainant. A relative of Ratnavva, Bevuraj Rudrappa Heggannavar/petitioner No.1 had advised the deceased not to quarrel with Ratnavva as she has left her husband. It is further alleged that on 26.02.2020, the Kareppa told complainant that he is going to Benakatti fair, at that time the complainant was in Muanvalli. A relative of Ratnavva, Bevuraj Rudrappa Heggannavar/petitioner No.1 had advised the deceased not to quarrel with Ratnavva as she has left her husband. It is further alleged that on 26.02.2020, the Kareppa told complainant that he is going to Benakatti fair, at that time the complainant was in Muanvalli. It is further alleged that the deceased Kareppa went to Benakatti and started shouting in front of the house of Ratnavva and abused her in filthy language and at that time, accused No.5-Ratnavva, accused No.1/Rudrappa, Bavuraj/accused No.2 and his sister's son Guruputra Shivappa Kyamannavar/accused No.4 and one Anand Sakri/accused No.3 advised Kareppa that there is a fair in the village and this is not the right time to raise quarrel and asked him to go to his house. Kareppa left that place and again returned at 11.00 p.m. and started abusing Ratnavva/accused No.5. At that time, accused Nos.1 to 5 gathered and started abusing Kareppa stating that he will not understand even if he is advised and that he is ruining their reputation in the village during the time of fair and therefore they will not leave him and so saying, they held the neck of Kareppa and pulled him and Rudrappa/accused No.1 held neck of Kareppa forcefully and pushed him in gutter and dashed his head to the edge of the gutter. Accused No.1 assaulted Kareppa with hands and legs and thereby caused serious injuries and told everyone that if anybody informed the family of Kareppa about the said incident even they will suffer like Kareppa. Because of the threat given by accused No1, no one informed about the incident to the complainant. Rudrappa/accused No.1 and Bavuraj/accused No.2 informed undle of the complainant Devendra about the said incident and told him that the matter should be finished here and elders can resolve the matter as they have committed a mistake and gave him life threat stating that if he told about this incident to anyone, he will be finished. Because of the threat given, he did not inform the complainant. Uncle of the complainant Devendra has told about the said incident. The complainant is residing in Benakatti and when she enquired in the village, she came to know that the accused persons have committed the murder of her husband Kareppa. The said complaint came to be registered in Murgod Police Station in Crime No.171/2020. Uncle of the complainant Devendra has told about the said incident. The complainant is residing in Benakatti and when she enquired in the village, she came to know that the accused persons have committed the murder of her husband Kareppa. The said complaint came to be registered in Murgod Police Station in Crime No.171/2020. The petitioners came to be arrested on 31.07.2020. They filed bail application and the same came to be rejected by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, in Crl.Misc.No.1205/2018. 3. The petitioners earlier had filed the petition seeking bail in Criminal Petition No.101076/2020 and same came to be rejected on the ground that investigation is still in progress and the role of the petitioners and other accused is yet to be ascertained by the Investigating Officer. Thereafter, after filing the charge sheet the petitioners have filed bail application in Crl.Misc.No.1861/2020 and same came to be rejected by an order dated 23.12.2020 passed by X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court seeking bail. 4. Heard the arguments of Sri. Akshay Katti, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Seema Shiva Naik, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent – State. 5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the death of Kareppa was on 27.02.2020 and at that time, wife of the deceased had filed the complaint which came to be registered as UD. It is his further contention that the police summoned the complainant on 30.07.2020 and asked about the injuries sustained by the deceased and at that time she filed complaint on 30.07.2020. It is his further submission that in the statements of the witnesses recorded in UD.No.7/2020 and also in the inquest mahazar there are no injuries found on the body of the deceased. It is his further contention that in the complaint no specific overt-act is alleged against accused Nos.2 and 4. It is his further contention that statement of the witnesses have been recorded after five months from the date of incident. The main allegation is against accused No.1. The overt-act alleged against these petitioners is that they had assaulted the deceased with hands. It is his further contention that statement of the witnesses have been recorded after five months from the date of incident. The main allegation is against accused No.1. The overt-act alleged against these petitioners is that they had assaulted the deceased with hands. It is his further contention that accused No.3 is similarly placed with that of accused Nos.2 and 4 has been granted bail in Criminal Petition No.100106/2021 and therefore on the ground of parity also the petitioners are entitled for grant bail. With this, he prayed for allowing the petition. 6. Per contra, Smt. Seema Shiva Naik, the learned High Court Government Pleader submits that earlier petitioners have filed the petition seeking bail and same came to be rejected. Now, the petitioners have not made out any new ground, except stating that the charge sheet has been filed. She further submits that CWs.16 to 19 are the eyewitnesses to the incident and they have specifically stated the overt-acts of the accused persons. With this, she prayed to dismiss the petition. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the charge sheet records. The wife of the deceased has filed complaint with regard to death of her husband and it was came to registered against the unknown persons in UDR. Thereafter, after receiving the P.M. Report the police have summoned the complainant and enquired about the injuries sustained by the deceased. In the said P.M. Report it is stated that there is head injuries and thereafter the complaint has been filed on 30.07.2020 against accused Nos.1 to 5. In the said complaint it is mentioned with regard to dispute between the deceased and accused No.5 -Ratnavva. The accused No.1 -Bavuraj who is the relative of accused No.5 -Ratnavva. The earlier bail application of the petitioners came to be rejected on the ground that investigation was in progress and charge sheet is not yet been filed and other accused were not yet ascertained by the Investigating Officer. Now the charge sheet has been filed. 8. On looking to the allegation leveled against accused No.1, he is the person who caused fatal injuries to the deceased. The allegation leveled against accused Nos.2 and 4 is that they had assaulted the deceased with hands. Now the charge sheet has been filed. 8. On looking to the allegation leveled against accused No.1, he is the person who caused fatal injuries to the deceased. The allegation leveled against accused Nos.2 and 4 is that they had assaulted the deceased with hands. Accused No.3 who is similarly placed with that of accused Nos.2 and 4 has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Petition No.100106/2021. Therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity as similarly placed with that of accused No.3. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the investigation is already completed and charge sheet is also been filed and the petitioners who are already arrested, the petitioners may be released by imposing stringent conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following.. ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners – accused Nos.2 and 4 shall be released on bail in Crime No.171/2020 (now C.C.No.1194/2020) of Murgod Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 302, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:- i) Petitioners – accused Nos.2 and 4 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Only) each with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. ii) Petitioners – accused Nos.2 and 4 shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly. iii) Petitioners – accused Nos.2 and 4 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the learned Sessions Judge. iv) Petitioners -accused Nos.2 and 4 shall furnish proof of their correct residential address and shall inform the Court if there is any change in the address. v) Petitioners -accused Nos.2 and 4 shall appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing.