Allowed

Abhiswamy S/O Rangaswamy, v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Mar 2021CRL.P/1314/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a successive application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for an accused in N.D.P.S. Act offences, accepting parity with the main accused who was granted bail by the Supreme Court, despite objections regarding the petitioner's absence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted to anticipatory bail subject to a bond of ₹2,00,000 and two sureties with specific conditions of attendance and non-tampering.

Abhiswamy S/O Rangaswamy, Vs State of Karnataka — Narcotics (NDPS) | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1314/2021

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

ABHISWAMY S/O RANGASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT PRAGATHI FARM, 19^TH KM TUMKUR ROAD, DASANAPURA HOBLI, MADANAIYAKANAHALLI, MADAVARA, BENGALURU, BANGALORE NORTH-560038, KARNATAKA.

¶7

PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI HANUMANTHARAYA C.H., ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY COTON PETE P.S. (CCB), BANGALORE, REP.BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, BENGALURU-01.

¶11

RESPONDENT

¶12

(BY SRI VEERANNA G.TIGADI, SPL.P.P.)

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF COTTONPET P.S. BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 21, 21(c), 27(b), 27A, 29 OF N.D.P.S. ACT AND SECTION 120B OF I.P.C.

¶14

: 2 :

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION PERTAINING TO PRINCIPAL BENCH, BENGALURU, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING AT DHARWAD, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The petitioner is accused No.10 in Crime

¶18

No.109/2020 registered by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 21, 21(c), 27(b), 27A of N.D.P.S. Act and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. This is a successive application by the petitioner for anticipatory bail, his earlier application was dismissed by order dated 03.11.2020.

¶19

Heard Sri Hanumantharaya C.H., the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Veeranna G.Tigadi, the Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

¶20

Sri Hanumantharaya C.H. submitted that the main accused in this case i.e. accused No.1 has been admitted to anticipatory bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The allegation against the petitioner is not as serious as against other petitioners. Therefore, it is his

¶21

: 3 :

¶22

argument that the ground of parity is applicable for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Sri Veeranna G.Tigadi opposes the application for anticipatory bail; his submission is that the ground of parity is not applicable and that the petitioner has remained absconded for all these days without cooperating with the investigating officer.

¶24

Petitioner’s counsel has produced order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.6185/2020. Perusal of this order shows that accused No.1-Shivaprakash was admitted to anticipatory bail. In view of this, I am of the opinion that parity is applicable. Hence, the following:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(a) Petition is allowed.

¶27

(b) In the event of arrest of the petitioner by the respondent police, he shall be released on bail by obtaining from him a bond for `2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only) and two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer.

¶28

: 4 :

¶29

The petitioner is subjected to the following conditions:

¶30

(i) He shall not tamper with the evidence and threaten the witnesses.

¶31

(ii) He shall mark his attendance before the police station once in a month preferably on Sunday between 9.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon till trial is over.

¶32

(iii) He shall not get involved in any criminal case in future.

¶33

(iv) He shall regularly appear before the trial court till conclusion of trial.

¶34

Violation of any of the conditions will be seriously

¶35

viewed for cancellation of bail.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

CLK

Abhiswamy S/O Rangaswamy, v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhiswamy S/O Rangaswamy, 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

Manju R S Vs State of Karnataka

Zameer @ Bacchan Vs State of Karnataka

Tukaram S/O Satappa Horatti Vs Rukmawwa W/O Mallappa Bhadrashetti

Arjuna Vs State by

Taabsheer K Vs the State of Karnataka

Vinesh @ Vinay Vs State of Karnataka