This High Court rejected a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The Court found that custodial investigation was necessary and materials existed against the petitioners, entitling them to no bail at this stage. Petitioners were directed to surrender.
Petition dismissed; accused directed to surrender for disposal of bail.
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 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.200498/2021
BETWEEN:
ALL ARE R/O SAVUR VILLAGE TQ. & DIST. YADGIRI-585201.
… PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. USTAD SAADATH HUSSAIN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH SAIDAPUR P.S.
2
DIST. YADGIRI, (REPRESENTED BY LEARNED ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI - 585105.
… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS TO THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE THE ACCUSED PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.21/2021 OF SAIDAPUR P.S. DISTRICT YADGIRI, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT YADGIRI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 355, 307, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Accused Nos.2, 5, 6, 8 and 10 in Crime No.21/2021
of Saidapur police station, Yadgiri district are before this Court for grant of anticipatory bail.
Upon the complaint lodged by Smt.Parvatemma, Saidapur police registered a case in Crime No.21/2021
3
initially for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 355, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC. Thereafter, the matter being investigated and during the course of investigation, offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC is also invoked.
4
Sri Ustad Sadat Hussain vehemently contended that these petitioners have no nexus with the alleged incident and they have been falsely implicated in the case. He also contended that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature and therefore, the gravity of the offences
has been scale down to a considerable extent and therefore, invoking of Section 307 of IPC is bad in law. He also contended that the accused/petitioners are law abiding citizens and they are ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Thus, prays for allowing the petition.
by the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail on 05.03.2021 before the Sessions Judge, the petitioners are absconding and therefore, they are not entitled for grant of
5
anticipatory bail. Thus, sought for dismissal of the petition.
6
opinion that no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail and therefore, following order is passed.
ORDER
Petition is dismissed.
However, if the accused/petitioners surrender before
the trial Court, their bail petition be disposed of as early as possible in accordance with law.
Sd/JUDGE
Srt
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to accused petitioners pending investigation where facts necessitate custodial interrogation.
If custodial investigation is required and materials exist against the accused, whether they are disentitled from bail under Section 438 CrPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SHARANAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA AND OTHERS
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
V. SRISHANANDA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
