Allowed

Satish @ Satya @ Market Satya v. the State through

Karnataka HC15 Jun 2016CRL.P/200608/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition for bail. The court held that the petitioner's arrest based on hearsay testimony that he instigated the murder was unjustified as he was not present at the crime scene. Bail was granted subject to conditions including execution of a bond, cooperation with investigation, and not tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail subject to execution of a personal bond of Rs. 40,000 with surety, cooperation with investigation, no leave to leave jurisdiction, and no tampering with prosecution evidenc

Satish @ Satya @ Market Satya Vs the State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2016

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200608/2016

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Satish @ Market Satish S/o Venkatswamy Reddy, Age: 34 years, Residents of Yakub Maniyar Chala, Opp: LIC Office, Kalaburagi.

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(Shri Liyaqat Fareed Ustad, Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

The State through Brahmpur Police Station, Kalaburagi.

¶13

… RESPONDENT

¶14

(Shri P.S. Patil, Government Pleader)

¶15

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to allow the petition and enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail in Crime No.20/2016 of Brahmpur

¶16

¶17

Police Station Kalaburagi, which is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 212, 120(B), 109 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code & under Section 39(1), 3(2), (5) of SC/ST PA Act.

¶18

This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate.

¶21

The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.5 in a case involving murder committed in broad daylight. There are eyewitnesses to the incident. However, the present petitioner has been arrayed as the accused on the say of CW-16 Vijaykumar who is said to have overheard the present petitioner insighting and provoking the accused to commit the murder of the deceased. Though it is also a fact as recorded by the court below that the present petitioner has been in custody in relation to yet another case since 1.1.2016. Therefore, it was apparent that he was not present

¶22

¶23

at the time of the incident. It is only on the say of the above said witness that he had overheard the accused talking to the other accused about the commission of murder, that the present accused has also been arrayed as an accused and the refusal of bail on that ground may not be justified as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶24

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The accused in the event of his release from custody, since he is in custody in relation to yet another case, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:

¶25

i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- with a surety for a likesum;

¶26

ii) The petitioner shall undertake to co-operate with the investigating authorities as and when called upon, to assist in the investigation;

¶27

iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court below without the leave of the Court; and

¶28

¶29

iv) The petitioner shall not, in any manner, seek to tamper

¶30

with the prosecution evidence.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

Satish @ Satya @ Market Satya v. the State through

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish @ Satya @ Market Satya v. the State through

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shanta Vs Mahantesha

Basanna Vs Devendrappa

Praveen S/O Basavaraj Sappanna Vs the State of Karnataka

Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company Ltd. Ors. Vs Smt. Ramakka @ Ramalamma W/O Late Malli and Ors.

Wazid Patel S/O Late Patel and Anr. Vs the State

Honnappa S/O Hanmanth Battar Vs the State through