The Karnataka High Court dismissed a criminal petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court held that the petitioner's history of absconding and delaying the trial for over six years, despite warrants, precluded the grant of anticipatory bail.
Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail dismissed.
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 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION No.301/2021
BETWEEN:
Ashraf s/o.Mohammad aged about 42 years Shylaja Extension Kushalnagar, Somwarpet Kodagu-571 236 ..Petitioner (By Ms.Raksha Keerthana., Advocate For Sri Kemparaju, Advocate)
AND:
State of Karnataka By Kushalnagar Police Station Kodagu Rep.by SPP, High Court Building Bengalauru-560 001 ..Respondent
(By Smt.Rashmi Jadhav, HCGP)
This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by the advocate for the petitioner praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the
2
petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.239/2014 (CC.No.18/2016) of Kushalnagar Police Station, Kodagu District for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 307, 324, 323 r/w. Section 34 of IPC.
This criminal petition coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R
This petition is filed by accused No.2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for granting anticipatory bail in Crime No.239/2014 registered by Kushalnagar Police for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 307, 324, 323 r/w. Section 34 of IPC.
Srikanth who is the employee of a Bar and Restaurant, before the police that this petitioner along with accused Nos.1 and 3 came to Bar at 12.20 a.m. on 30.8.2014 and demanded to supply Brandy, when they said that the bar is already closed and they cannot supply brandy, accused Nos.1 to 3 said to have abused the
3
complainant. Accused No.1 said to have assaulted CW.2 with knife and other accused said to have assaulted him. After assaulting, accused Nos.1 to 3 ran away from the spot in a car.
4
contended that the petitioner is innocent and he is not aware of registration of the case. He is doing fruit vending business at Bengaluru and his mother is staying in Kodagu. He came to know about filing of the charge sheet only when attachment warrant has been issued by the Court. He is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. The injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature. Hence, he prayed for allowing the petition.
5
process of disposal of the case. Hence, she prayed for dismissal of the petition.
6
secured by the police. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is doing fruit vending business at Bengaluru City, but looking into the entire case, the petitioner has successfully delayed the process of the case for more than six years and absconded. Therefore, merely because the offence alleged is under Section 307 of IPC and injuries suffered by the injured are in simple in nature that itself is not a ground for granting anticipatory bail. If the petitioner is granted bail, he may again abscond and tamper with the prosecution witnesses, which cannot be ruled out. Hence, petitioner is not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed .
Sd/JUDGE
*ck/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail shall be granted to an accused who has absconded and delayed the trial proceedings for over six years.
Whether the nature of injuries being simple is a sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail in the face of absconding.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Ashraf
State of Karnataka
K. NATARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
