The High Court dismissed a criminal petition filed to quash conditions imposed by the Sessions Judge on an anticipatory bail order. The petitioners, who had been absent for over a year, did not appear to argue the matter.
The criminal petition was 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 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION No.407 of 2020
BETWEEN
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT FLAT No.B 1401, ‘B’ BLOCK, 14TH FLOOR, MANTRI GREEN APARTMENTS SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU – 03.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAVI L. VAIDYA, ADVOCATE (absent))
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY THE KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY – 560 078, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LXXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DATED 20.11.2019 IN CRL.MISC.No.10057/2019 IN SO FAR AS IT PERTIANS TO THE FOLLOWING-NOTWITHSTANDING THIS ORDER OF
2
ANTICIPATORY BAIL THE IO IS AT LIBERTY TO TAKE THE PETITIONERS INTO HIS CUSTODY WITH PRIOR PERMISSION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL MAGISTRATE, IF THE PETITIONERS ARE ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED FOR FURTHER CUSTODIAL INTERROGATION AND CONSEQUENTIAL RECOVERY IF ANY-BY UPHOLDING THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE SAID ORDER.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION , THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent-State.
Learned counsel for the petitioners remained absent.
3
reserved liberty to the Police for taking custody of the petitioners/accused with prior permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate for the purpose of further custodial interrogation and consequential recovery, if any. On perusal of the said order, I do not find any error to interfere with the same. The petitioners have also remained absent for more than 1½ years. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, the criminal petition is dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
mv
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a criminal petition for quashing an anticipatory bail order imposed conditions on the petitioners without appearance should be dismissed.
Whether the High Court can interfere with the conditions imposed by the Sessions Judge regarding custody for interrogation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gadde Sunil Kumar Choudhary, V. Padmavathi
The State of Karnataka
K. Natarajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court