Anticipatory bail sought by accused No.7 in a case under Section 379 IPC and Sections 86 and 87 Karnataka Forest Act concerning sandalwood billets. Charge sheet filed showing petitioner as absconding since the incident. Bail refused; petition 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2106 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NARAYANASWAMY K N.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.PC. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.201/2022 REGISTERED BY SRINIVASPURA POLICE STATION, KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 379 OF IPC R/W SEC. 84, 86 AND 87 OF KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., SRINIVASAPURA IN C.C.NO.38/2023.
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner-accused No.7 is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.201/2022 of Srinivasapura Police Station, pending in CC No.38/2023 on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Srinivasapura, registered for the offences punishable under Section 379 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') read with Sections 86 and 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant-Harishkumar N.
“Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?”
My answer to the above point is in ‘Negative' for the following:
R E A S O N S
Petitioner being accused No.7 is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail. FIR came to be registered for the above said offences. Investigation is completed and the charge sheet is filed showing the petitioner as absconding. Accused Nos.1 to 4 are on bail. It is the specific case of the prosecution that accused Nos.1 to 5 have agreed to sell the sandalwood billets to accused Nos.6 and 7. The date of incident is 07.08.2022. The petitioner is absconding since then. Considering the nature of the allegations, I do not find any reason to grant anticipatory bail in his favour.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed .
SD/JUDGE
TL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, shown absconding in a sandalwood theft case, was entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Basheer S/o Ismail
The State of Karnataka (Sub Inspector of Police, Srinivaspura Police Station)
M G Uma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
