Bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving offences under Sections 312, 313, 315 and 316 IPC. Counsel pressed for relief despite the court's adverse view; a withdrawal memo was filed and the petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:22933 CRL.P No. 5576 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5576 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
AKHILASH H P S/O. LATE PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/AT HOSKOTE VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY H., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PANDAVAPURA POLICE STATION, MANDYA DISTRICT, REP. BY HIGH COURT SPP, BENGALURU-560 001.
Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: high court of karnataka
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K RAHUL RAI, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.102/2024 REGISTERED BY THE PANDAVAPURA POLICE STATION, MANDYA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 312, 313, 315, 316 R/W 34 OF IPC, SEC. 19 OF THE KARNATAKA PRIVATE MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT ACT AND SEC. 4 OF THE TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA (SITTING AT SRIRANGAPATNA) AND ETC.
NC: 2024:KHC:22933 CRL.P No. 5576 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri. Pavana Chandra Shetty H, learned counsel for the petitioner has addressed his arguments in support of the case made out by the petitioner. After hearing the learned counsel at length and also the learned High Court Government Pleader, the Court expressed its opinion that it is not a case for granting bail. But the learned counsel for the petitioner repeatedly pressuring the Court to allow the petition. He was not ready to hear the request made by the Court to allow for dictating the Orders. The learned counsel by raising his voice, started commanding the Court that the petition cannot be dismissed, but on the other hand, it is to be allowed. He was interrupting the Court from dictating the Orders, inspite of repeated warnings of initiating action against him, as his behavior is unbecoming of a professional and showing disrespect to the Court. It is nothing but interfering with the discharge of judicial function and intimidating the Court. Thereby, he has undermined the dignity and decorum of the Court. The learned counsel, in my opinion, has committed contempt of Court. Therefore, he may be served with the notice of contempt for
having interfered with the functioning of the Court and demeaning the dignity and decorum of the Court.
for the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to permit him to withdraw the petition as not pressed.
By accepting the memo filed on behalf of the petitioner, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
Sd/JUDGE
SPV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Akhilash H P
State of Karnataka by Pandavapura Police Station, Mandya District
M G Uma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
