Mahesh v. the State of Karnataka by
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court of Karnataka granted bail in part to two petitioners accused of misappropriation and opening fictitious accounts, relying on a prior similar order, while rejecting bail for a third petitioner due to specific allegations of introducing others for the crime.
What did the court decide?
Bail granted to two petitioners (Accused Nos. 6 and 17) on personal bond; bail rejected for one petitioner (Accused No. 16).
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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 AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6682/2022
C/W.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7078/2022
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6682/2022.
BETWEEN:
MAHESH S/O. LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT NO.TMP WARD NO.4, NO.4/65, NEAR YALLAMMA TEMPLEX, BHOVI COLONY, ANEKAL TOWN, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN 562106
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAJKUMAR H.K., ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER; SRI. AKKIMANJUNATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER (NOC)) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY TUMKUR CEN CRIME POLICE STATION, TUMKUR, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU-560001
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to petitioners accused of misappropriating funds and opening fictitious accounts.
Whether to grant bail by parity with a previous order in a similar set of allegations.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mahesh
- petitioner
Shekhar T.
- petitioner
Yogesh M.
- respondent
The State of Karnataka
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Karnataka HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRL.P/6682/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court