Dismissed

Mr Karthikeyan Balu v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Nov 2020CRL.P/4270/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court dismissed a successive bail petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a rape trial. Noting the continuous absence of the petitioner's counsel and lack of representation or change of circumstances, the court extracted the offending substance from a previous order and rejected the petition to avoid judicial wastage.

What did the court decide?

The successive bail petition filed in Cr.No.52/2020 is dismissed.

Mr Karthikeyan Balu Vs State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4270 OF 2020

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Mr. Karthikeyan Balu Aged about 27 years S/o. Balu Residing at No.353/085 Sumathi Colony, Kinnipalayam Mettupudur, Erode Vijiyamangalam Tamilnadu - 638056 …Petitioner (By Sri. Kumara K.G., Adv. (Absent))

¶9

And:

¶10

State of Karnataka through Attibele P.S Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bangalore-560001 …Respondent (By Sri.Thejesh, HCGP)

¶11

This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the advocate for the petitioner praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.52/2020 of Attibele P.S., Anekal Bengaluru for the offence p/u/s 376 of IPC.

¶12

¶13

This criminal petition coming on for orders this day, the court made the following:

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Learned HCGP accepts notice on behalf of

¶16

respondent-State.

¶17

Heard.

¶18

On perusal of the order sheet it is revealed

¶19

that the petitioner’s counsel is continuously absent and there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶20

4. This is a successive bail petition. In order

¶21

to avoid wastage of judicial time, the substance of the bail application is extracted from the previous order dated 29.06.2020 passed in Crl.P.No.2673/2020,

¶22

which reads as under:

¶23

“8. Heard.

¶24

9. The substance of the complaint as could be seen from the record is that it is lodged by one victim lady who is a resident of

¶25

¶26

Kanchanayakanahalli, Anekal Taluk and doing flower business at Chandapura. She was married to one Laxman but he died six years back and for past three to four months one Venkatesh was accompanying her. As he was very much quarrelsome with the complainant, the owner of the house had sent him out of the house and she doe not know where he went. On the previous day i.e., on 11.02.2020 she had gone to bring flowers and after her job she was standing at Hosur bus stand. At that time a male person aged between 30 to 35 years stranger to the victim-complainant asked her as to where she was going. She told to Attibele. He said, he is also going to Bommanahali. Both of them got into the bus, he purchased the bus ticket for the victim as well. While in bus he said that he has relatives at Attibele near Attible Toll and he would introduce her to them and invited her to accommodate. She accompanied him it was 8.15 P.M. They got down from the bus and took her to the left

¶27

¶28

of the road and walked for a while. It was dark complainant generated suspicion and said that she does not want to got along with him further. For that the person stretched his hand to the waist of that lady and dragged her for a while with force and that place was coconut grove and fenced. He stripped the victim asked the victim to remove clothes, she refused and tried to scream but he threatened her of life. He tied her to a coconut tree with the help of her saree and raped her and thereafter removed saree and made her to lay on the ground and again raped her. Accused was in the drunken state. After a while, when he was asleep she got up and ran away and reached a nearby house and collected a saree. Thereafter she telephoned police through her mobile. After sometime police came and she was rescued. When she took the police to the alleged place of incident, accused had gone away. Thereafter came to the police station, police immediately took her to Oxford hospital and got medical

¶29

¶30

treatment. She states that she was raped from 9 P.M., to 11 P.M. The FIR came to be registered in Crime No.52/2020 on 12.02.2020 at 20.15 hours. The date of offence is stated to be 11.02.2020 between 9 to 11 P.M.”

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner is absent continuously. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not available, even to mention regarding the change of circumstances. Even on facts and the circumstances pleaded in the petition there is no grounds to allow the petition. The present application filed as

¶32

successive one is rejected.

¶33

Accordingly, petition is dismissed.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

Mr Karthikeyan Balu v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Karthikeyan Balu 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

M/S Networth Stock Broking Limited Vs Smt Shanthala

H P Siddappa Vs Siddappa

M/S Rolastar Private Limited Vs M/S Hvac Systems Pvt. Ltd.

Sri U D Manjunatha Vs Sri Nagaraju

Smt Gangamma W/O Late Basappa Vs Mr Thippeswamy S/O Shivarudrappa

Mr Mohammed Saleem Vs Mr Abdul Rahim Hussain