Criminal petition for regular bail dismissed as successive petition. Court held that prolonged detention is not ground for bail where overt act of inflicting injury remains serious.
Bail denied; Trial Court directed to dispose matter expeditiously.
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 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1457/2022
BETWEEN
MADHU @ SLUM @ MANOJA S/O. CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT NO. 184, 3RD MAIN, 4TH CROSS NEAR ASHWINI SCHOOL LAVAKUSHA NAGAR, LAGGERE BENGALURU -560 058. AND ALSO NATIVE ADDRESS DODDAARASINAKERE VILLAGE CHAKKARASANAKERE HOBLI MADDURU TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571428
… PETITIONER
[BY SRI HARISHA A S, ADVOCATE]
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NANDINI LAYOUT POLICE STATION REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001.
… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING THIS COURT TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.13/2020 OF NANDINI LAYOUT P.S.,
2
BENGALURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 397 AND 395 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 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner in Crime No.13/2020 of Nandini Layout Police Station, Bengaluru city for the offences punishable under Sections 397 and 395 of IPC.
3
the door of the complainant, accused No.4 inflicted injury with the machete and this petitioner inflicted injury with the stick and considered the matter on merits. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a changed circumstances and the changed circumstances is that he is in custody from last two and half years. The matter is also committed to the concerned Court and he is languishing in the jail from last two and half years and hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
the parties and also on perusal of the material available on record it discloses that this Court vide order dated 26.11.2020, rejected the bail petition filed by the petitioner after filing of the
4
charge-sheet and now the only contention raised by the petitioner’s counsel is that the petitioner is in custody from two and half years and the same is a changed circumstances and having taken note of the material available on record the specific overt act allegation is made against this petitioner is that he inflicted injury with the stick on the head of the victim and accused No.4 also inflicted injury with the machete on the victim and apart from that the allegation is that they took the car, mobile and purse belonged to the victim. When such being the case, the contention raised by the learned counsel for petitioner that he is in custody from two and half years is not a ground to enlarge him on bail in a successive bail petition.
ORDER
The successive bail petition is rejected.
However, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/JUDGE
SN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether length of detention from two and half years constitutes changed circumstances for granting bail in a successive bail petition after charge-sheet filing.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Madhu @ Slum @ Manoja
The State of Karnataka
H.P. Sandesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
