The High Court of Karnataka dismissed an anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 CrPC as the petitioners' counsel was absent and the matter remained unrepresented on the date of hearing.
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 AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF JANUARY 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5041 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONERS
(By Shri Charles E., Advocate [absent] )
2
AND:
State of Karnataka, By Ulsoor Police Station, Represented by learned State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore – 560 008.
…RESPONDENT
(By Shri S. Vishwamurthy, Government Pleader)
This Criminal Petition filed under Section 438 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.190/2016 of Halasur Police Station, Bangalore, for the offence punishable under Sections 307 and 323 read with 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R
The case though having been listed continuously on
several dates of hearing, the counsel for the petitioners has
remained absent. Even today, there is no representation.
Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KS
Mr. Irfan, Son of Mushyar Jan
Tanjeel, Son of M.F.Farooq
State of Karnataka
Anand Byrareddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
