Dismissed

Sri Udaykumar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Nov 2020CRL.P/3570/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail by parity with other accused persons, the Karnataka High Court held that successive petitions cannot be entertained on merits unless there is a change in circumstances which was not established.

What did the court decide?

Bail petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking release on grounds of parity with other accused is rejected.

Sri Udaykumar Vs State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 09^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3570/2020

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Sri. Udaykumar, S/o. Venkatesh Murthy, Aged about 23 years, Permanent R/at Guddadahalli Village, Anjanahalli Post, Madabal Hobli, Magadi Taluk, Ramanagara – 561 201. …Petitioner

¶9

(By Sri. Tejas N., Advocate)

¶10

AND:

¶11

State of Karnataka, By Magadi Police, Ramanagara – 562 120.

¶12

(Rep. by the learned State Public Prosecutor, HCK, Bengaluru – 01)

¶13

Swamy M., S/o. Late Muniyappa, Aged about 30 years, R/at Managallu Village, Madabalu Hobli,

¶14

¶15

Magadi Taluk, Ramanagara – 562 127.

¶16

...Respondents

¶17

(By Smt. K.P. Yashodha, HCGP for R1)

¶18

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.119/2019 registered by Magadi Police Station, Ramanagara for the offences p/u/s 302, 201, 363, 114, 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC.

¶19

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

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This is the second petition filed on behalf of accused No.3. The earlier petition filed by the petitioner along with three other accused was rejected by order dated 10.01.2020 in Crl.P.No.8239/2019. Since then, accused Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7 having been enlarged on bail by this Court, the petitioner has moved the instant petition seeking release of the petitioner on the ground of parity.

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that the deceased

¶23

– Ravi was in love with the daughter of accused No.4 and in this connection on 30.06.2019, accused Nos.1 to 6 entered into criminal conspiracy and in furtherance thereof,

¶24

¶25

abducted the deceased in an auto-rickshaw bearing registration No.KA-02 AF 7077 and assaulted him with hockey sticks and stone and further carried him to Siddaiahanapalya and assaulted him with chopper, dragger and hockey stick and caused his death. Accused No.5 is stated to have instigated commission of the alleged offences. Eye witness has clearly stated that initial assault was made by accused Nos.1 to 3. His statement goes to show that accused Nos.1 to 3 took the deceased in the auto-rickshaw, thereafter, his dead body was found under the bridge at Belagumba.

¶26

In view of the above material, petitioner cannot

¶27

claim parity with accused Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7.

¶28

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the

¶29

instant petition is filed seeking bail on merits. I am afraid that the successive bail cannot be entertained on merits unless there is change of circumstances. The only changed circumstance projected by the learned counsel for petitioner is the enlargement of accused Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7. As the

¶30

¶31

said petitioner/accused No.3 stands on different footing, the release of the said accused persons cannot be construed as a changed circumstance, to entertain the petition.

¶32

Hence, petition is rejected .

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

Sri Udaykumar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Udaykumar v. State of Karnataka

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

Smt. Anjana a Shanthaveer Vs Sri. Babu Rao Chunchansur

Lokesh Vs State of Karnataka

Dayanand Vs State of Karnataka

K Mehfuz Ali Khan Vs State of Karnataka by

Smt. Rani Samyuktha Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri M Dharesh Babu Vs Sri Sayyapa Rajusravan Kumar