Dismissed¶42

Suhas N v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Jan 2025CRL.P/12140/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suhas N v. State of Karnataka (Kamakshipalya PS), CRL.P No. 12140 of 2024, High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, decided 07-01-2025 by Mrs Justice M G Uma (oral order). Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. sought by accused No.2 in Crime No.122/2021 (informant Sri. Manoj) for offences under Sections 395 and 120(B) IPC, pending in CC No.32154/2022. Bail denied: earlier bail (Crl.P.No.8698/2021, order dated 11.02.2022) was violated, petitioner absconded, NBW unexecuted, surrendered 02.09.2024; five prior cases incl. Sections 399, 302, 379 IPC. Petition dismissed; no precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

The point framed for consideration — whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. — is answered in the negative; bail is refused. ¶28

Suhas N Vs the State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:244 CRL.P No. 12140 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12140 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SUHAS N S/O NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS R/AT 15, 18^TH CROSS RAGHAVENDRA LAYOUT, TIGARAPALYA, PEENYA 2^ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 058

¶9

Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: high court of karnataka

¶10

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. DEENABANDHU RAI .N., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KAMAKSHIPALYA POLICE STATION BENGALURU, NOW REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001

¶13

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VENKAT SATHYANAYAN, HCGP)

¶14

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 (FILED U/S.483 BNNS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.122/2021 NOW IN C.C.NO.32154/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE KAMAKSHIPALYA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 395, 120-B OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE

¶15

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:244 CRL.P No. 12140 of 2024

¶17

OF THE HONBLE XXIV ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT AT BENGALURU.

¶18

THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

The petitioner-accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.122/2021 of Kamakshipalya Police Station, pending in CC No.32154/2022 on the file of the learned XXXIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 395 and 120(B) of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Sri. Manoj.

¶22

Heard Sri.Deenabandhu Rai N., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Venkat Sathyanarayan, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused the materials on record.

¶23

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶24

¶25

NC: 2025:KHC:244 CRL.P No. 12140 of 2024

¶26

“Whether the petitioner is entitled

¶27

for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶28

My answer to the above point is in ‘negative’ for the following:

¶29

R E A S O N S

¶30

Petitioner being accused No.2 is seeking grant of bail. Initially petitioner had approached this Court by filing Crl.P.No.6580/2021 along with co-accused seeking grant of bail. Said petition came to be allowed in-part granting bail in favour of accused No.6, while rejecting the prayer made by the present petitioner. It is noticed that serious allegations were made against the petitioner for having committed the offence and he was caught red handed while committing the offence. Incriminating materials were recovered at the instance of the petitioner. It is also stated that the petitioner is having four other criminal cases registered against him, including the offences under Sections 399, 302 and 379 of IPC. Considering all those facts, the petition came to be dismissed.

¶31

The petitioner again approached this Court by filing Crl.P.No.8698/2021 seeking grant of bail. The said petition was

¶32

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:244 CRL.P No. 12140 of 2024

¶34

allowed vide order dated 11.02.2022 holding that even though several other cases are pending against him and he is having criminal antecedents, same may not be the ground to detain him in custody, since the investigation is completed in this case and charge sheet is filed. While allowing the said petition and granting bail in favour of the petitioner, specific condition was imposed directing the petitioner to appear before the Trial Court as and when required. But after being released on bail, the petitioner has remained absconding. NBW was came to be issued against the petitioner by the Trial Court and inspite of that, the same could not be executed. However, on 02.09.2024, petitioner appears to have surrendered before the Trial Court as he was compelled to do so.

¶35

The materials on record disclose that the petitioner is having criminal antecedents and as many as five cases are registered against him. Even though once bail was granted with the firm hope that the petitioner will mend himself and comply with the conditions imposed while granting bail, he violated the bail conditions and remained absconding, which resulted in pendency of the criminal case before the Trial Court without any progress and compelled the Trial Court to issue NBW

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:244 CRL.P No. 12140 of 2024

¶38

repeatedly to secure the presence of the petitioner. The conduct of the petitioner disentitles him from seeking grant of bail.

¶39