This direct bail petition was dismissed. The court noted the petitioner's absence despite an adjournment request, then quashed the orders and delivered a concise rejection based on strong prima facie evidence, daring nature of robbery, and prior rejections of co-accused.
bail application rejected
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, KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3523/2016
BETWEEN: Dayashankar @ Shankar S/o Basavaraj Aged about 34 years Resident at Hasurahalli Jakkanahalli Nelmangala Taluk Bangalore Rural – 562 123 (Now in judicial custody) Now new address: Rotary 1st main, 2nd Cross, Dwarka Nagar, Chikkabnavar, Bengaluru North - 562126
… PETITIONER
(Shri Praveen Harish Prabhu, Advocate)
AND:
State of Karnataka By Sindhanoor Rural Police Represented by State Public Prosecutor,
2
High Court Building, Bangalore – 01.
(Shri Sheshadri Jaishankar M., Government Pleader)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.26/2016 of Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, Raichur District for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397, 411 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R
The learned Counsel for the petitioner is absent. A request is made for an adjournment.
However it is seen that according to the complainant, he was working as a lorry driver under one Basavaraj Maligi who was the owner of the lorry. It is alleged that on 01.02.2016 the complainant after loading 140 bags of Chana dal,140 bags of toor dal and 60 bags of polished chana dal totally 340 bags, had left Gulbarga at about 12:00 noon towards Shivamogga and he
3
was the sole occupant of the lorry. On 02.02.2016 at about 1:00 a.m. he had reached Siraguppa road, Budihal camp, near Pragati Grameena Bank and when he parked the lorry, it transpires that four persons aged between 20 and 25, had come armed with deadly weapons and they had dragged the complainant out of the lorry and one of them had assaulted him with the blunt edge of a machete behind his knee resulting in a grievous injury and the accused had taken away the lorry loaded with foodgrains towards Siruguppa.
4
investigation the petitioner along with several others had been apprehended and it was revealed that the accused had master minded several such hijacks and were also said to have been involved in other such offences.
been committed and having regard to the positive information and incriminating materials that the police have gathered, the court below was justified in rejecting the bail petition. There is
5
no reason to form a different opinion and accordingly the bail
petition is rejected.
����
�����
sdu
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner charged with robbery and dacoity when counsel was absent and police evidence was strong.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dayashankar @ Shankar
State of Karnataka
Anand Byrareddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
