Criminal Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for bail in murder charge. Court allowed bail as co-accused Avinash was granted bail on parity, noting lack of motive and evidence against petitioner.
Petitioner enlarged on bail by furnishing self-bond of Rs. 50,000 with solvent surety for like sum.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.15172 OF 2013
BETWEEN :
Rajashekhar, S/o. Mallanna Handroli, Aged 22 years, Occupation: Jeep Driver, Resident of Ratakal, Taluk and District Gulbarga. … PETITIONER.
(By Shri Shiva Sharana Reddy, Advocate for Shri Ustad Sadat Hussain, Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka, Through Ratakal Police Station, Gulbarga.
… RESPONDENT.
(By Shri Sanjay A. Patil, Additional State Public Prosecutor)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the accused / petitioner on bail in Crime No.35/2012 of Ratakal Police Station, District: Gulbarga, which is registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 of the IPC.
This petition coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:
7O R D E R
The present petitioner is one of the accused, having been alleged for the commission of murder of one Thippanna. Thippanna @ Rajashekhar was found dead in a well. On suspicion that Thippanna was done to death by one Avinash since this Thippanna had developed an intimacy with the sister of Avinash and in spite of repeated warnings to stay away from her, Thippanna having continued to meet the sister of Avinash, it is alleged that Avinash, along with his friends, including the present petitioner, had killed him and dumped him in the well.
3
This Court, on a petition filed by Avinash, had granted him bail. On a parity of reasoning, the present petitioner is before this Court claiming that the prosecution has alleged no motive whatsoever, apart from claiming that he was an accomplice in the commission of the murder by Avinash. Since Avinash has been granted bail for lack of evidence, the present petitioner would stand on a better footing. Though the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would seek time to file Statement of objections, given the circumstances that this Court, by its order dated 21.01.2013, in Crl.P.No.15018/2013 had granted bail insofar as Avinash is concerned, the present petitioner is also entitled to bail.
Accordingly, the petition stands allowed, subject to the following conditions:
4
Court below, without the leave of the court.
investigation of the offence.
prosecution evidence.
Sd/JUDGE
KS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a murder case where a co-accused was already granted bail on parity of reasoning.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajashekhar
State of Karnataka
Anand Byrareddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
