High Court of Karnataka dismissed a third successive bail petition by an accused in a Murder/Section 34 IPC case. The Court found no changed circumstances as earlier grounds were already rejected and the non-appearance of eyewitnesses was not considered a fresh ground.
Petition for regular bail dismissed; accused to remain in custody.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7565/2020
BETWEEN:
MR. SURYA KUMAR, S/O SRINIVAS S, AGED 29 YEARS, 12TH CROSS PILLAGANAHALLI, NEAR ESHWARA TEMPLE, WEAVERS COLONY, B.G.ROAD, GOTTIGERE POST, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 083.
.. PETITIONER
(BY SRI SACHIN N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY MICOLAYOUT P.S., (REPRESENTED BY S.P.P.)
.. RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SHOWRI H.R., HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. AND PRAYED TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.148/2018 REGISTERED BY MICO LAYOUT POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 302 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC IN S.C.NO.1557/2018 PENDING BEFORE CCH65
2
LXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS COURT AT BANGALORE IN INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
This successive bail petition filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in Crime No.148/2018 registered by Mico Layout Police for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC on the complaint filed by one-Smt.Sudha R., the wife of deceased-Kush S., which is pending in Sessions Case No.1557/2018 on the file of CCH65 LXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Court at Bangalore.
3
No.3 approached this Court by filing Criminal Petition No.9577/2018 which came to be dismissed on 08.05.2019, again this petitioner and accused No.2 filed Criminal Petition No.7215/2019 which came to be rejected on 07.11.2019, again this petitioner and accused No.2 have filed Criminal Petition No.7644/2019 which also came to be dismissed on 06.01.2020. Hence, petitioner/accused No.3 is before this Court by way of successive bail petition.
4
mentioned in the postmortem report. Therefore, he prayed for granting bail.
5
witnesses and fixing the date for further trial on 14.11.2019. The charge sheet material also goes to show maximum witnesses have been examined, except a few witnesses including the three important material eyewitnesses. Though the learned counsel submits the police stated these witnesses will never come for giving evidence, but same cannot be considered by this Court as a fresh ground. It is the looked after of the trial Court to secure the presence of the witnesses by taking coercive steps and this Court now cannot presume that these three witnesses may not support the prosecution case. At this stage, if bail is granted, there is every possibility of the material eyewitnesses may be tampered and may not be turndown to the Court for giving evidence without fear in favour of the prosecution. I do not find any fresh material placed on record to consider 3rd successive bail petition of the petitioner/accused No.3. Accordingly petition is dismissed.
JUDGE
ckk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there are any changed circumstances or fresh grounds to grant regular bail in a third successive bail petition.
Whether the non-appearance of three prosecution eyewitnesses constitutes a fresh ground for bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mr. Surya Kumar
State
K. Natarajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
