JUDGMENT V. Srishananda, J. - Heard Sri C. Rajkumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. Vishwa Murthy, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and perused the records. 2. The present petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.PC. with the following prayer: 'Wherefore, the above named petitioner most humbly and respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant anticipatory bail in connection with the Crime No.17/2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 323, 324, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC, 1860 of Challakere Police, pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC Court, Challakere, Chitradurga, in the event of his arrest by the respondent Police, upon such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit to impose upon on the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.' 3. Brief facts of the care are as under: a Complaint came to be lodged by Vinay Kumar J. S/o. Jayaramappa before the Challakere Police Station. Based on which, the Police registered a case in Crime No.17/2022 dated 23.01.2022 for the offence punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 302, 323, 324, 504 149 IPC. 4. The gist of the complaint averments reveal that there was a construction of a temple. In that regard, there were some mis-understanding and committee meeting was convened on 23.01.2022. However, on 22.01.2022 at about 7.00 p.m., when the complainant and others were there in the house, Channappa and others including the petitioners, visited the house of the complainant and started assaulting Jayaramappa. among accused persons, Channappa and akash assaulted him with clubs. The petitioner herein and Obalesh have caused fist injury on the chest and abdomen of Jayaramappa. Ultimately, on cumulative effect of all the injuries, Jayaramappa lost his consciousness and he was taken to the Hospital in the autorickshaw. However, the doctors who examined Jayaramappa declared him as brought dead. Thereafter, complaint came to be lodged seeking action against the assailants. Present petitioner is shown as accused No.3. 5. The police after registering the case, are investigating the matter. 6. The petitioner approached the learned District Court for grant of anticipatory bail, which was turned down by order dated 7.3.2022 passed in Crl.Misc.No.95/2022. Thereafter, the petitioner is before this court. 7. Present petitioner is shown as accused No.3. 5. The police after registering the case, are investigating the matter. 6. The petitioner approached the learned District Court for grant of anticipatory bail, which was turned down by order dated 7.3.2022 passed in Crl.Misc.No.95/2022. Thereafter, the petitioner is before this court. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner re-iterating the petition grounds vehemently contended that the police have already recovered the clubs from the custody of accused persons who have been arrested and therefore, there is no necessity for custodial investigation and therefore, sought for grant of bail. 8. He also contended that the complaint averments reveal that this petitioner has caused fist injury on the chest and abdomen and therefore, it is not serious enough to deny the grant of bail and sought for allowing the petition. 9. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the bail petition stating that in order to un-earth the truth, custodial investigation is very much necessary. He also pointed out from the date of registration of the case till the dismissal of the bail petition, petitioner was not available and therefore, sought for rejection of the bail petition. 10. In view of the rival contentions, this court perused the material on record meticulously. 11. Even according to the complaint averments, the overt act against the present petitioner is that he has alone caused fist injury on the chest of the deceased, but the injury caused to the deceased on account of mis-appropriation of the funds in respect of Durgambika temple. a meeting was convened even before meeting could take place, the incident has occurred. 12. as could be seen from the material on record, the custodial investigation of the petitioner if any is only to the extent of recovery since already recovery of the weapons have been carried out by the Investigating agency by arresting the other accused persons, the custodial investigation is only to the limited extent. accordingly, the need of the custodial investigation by the prosecution and the right of the petitioner are to be harmoniously balanced. Hence, this court pass the following: ORDER (1) The Criminal Petition is allowed. accordingly, the need of the custodial investigation by the prosecution and the right of the petitioner are to be harmoniously balanced. Hence, this court pass the following: ORDER (1) The Criminal Petition is allowed. (2) The Petitioner is directed to join the investigation by appearing before the Investigating Officer of Challakere Police Station on 23.04.2022 at about 10.00 a.m., (3) The Investigation Officer is at liberty to take the petitioner to custody and complete the custodial investigation if any, on the same day before 7.00 p.m., and thereafter, enlarge the petitioner on bail, on taking a bond in a sum of Rs.1 lakh [Rupees One lakh only] with two sureties for the likesum. (4) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper the prosecution evidence or hamper the investigation process in any manner. (5) Petitioner shall mark his attendance before the Investigating Officer on every alternate Sunday between 10.00 a.m., and 2.00 p.m., till the final report is filed. (6) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Chitradurga District without prior permission. (7) Petitioner shall attend the court regularly. Violation of any of the above conditions, would entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail. Ordered accordingly.