State Of Karnataka Through vs Mahadevaswamy @ Kanni on 29 June, 2018

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

State Of Karnataka Through vs Mahadevaswamy @ Kanni on 29 June, 2018

Bench: John Michael Cunha

                          1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2018

                       BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA


         CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2307/2018

BETWEEN:

State of Karnataka,
Through Chamarajanagar Rural
Police Station,
Represented by State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Building,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
                                          ...Petitioner
(By Sri.S.Vishwa Murthy, HCGP)

AND:

1.     Mahadevaswamy @ Kanni,
       S/o Nagappa,
       Aged about 26 years,
       Harave Hobli,
       Chamarajanagar Taluk - 571 313.

2.     Sadashiva
       S/o Nagappa,
       Aged about 24 years.

3.     Mahesh @ Mahendra,
       S/o Channabasappa,
       Aged about 22 years.
                           2


4.   Siddaraju,
     Aged about 21 years.
                                        ...Respondents
(By Sri.Ravindra Babu.G, Advocate)

     This Criminal petition is filed under Section
439(2) of Cr.P.C praying to 1.cancel the order dated
04.01.2018 passed in Criminal Misc.No.552/2017 by
the   Principal   District  and    Sessions    Judge,
Chamarajanagara, granting anticipatory bail to the
accused-respondents in Crime No.360/2017 of
Bannerghatta Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 355, 341 read with
Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act and etc.

      This Criminal petition coming on for Orders, this
day, the court made the following:

                       ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C seeking cancellation of bail order made in favour of respondents in Crl.Misc.No.552/2017 dated 04.01.2018, by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar.

2. The said order came to be passed on the petition filed by respondents herein under Section 438 3 of Cr.P.C. Considering the nature of the allegations made in the complaint, learned Sessions Judge was of the opinion that the custodial interrogation of respondents was not necessary for the purpose of investigation into the alleged offence.

3. The only contention urged by learned HCGP is that Sessions Judge has not adverted his mind to the allegations made in the complaint and has mechanically passed the order without considering the gravity of offence.

4. I am unable to accept the submission. A perusal of the order indicates that the learned Magistrate has reproduced the contentions urged by the respective parties in paragraph No.7 and in paragraph No.8, separate reasons are assigned for admitting the respondents herein to bail. 4

5. No grounds are made out to cancel the bail granted by the trial court. When bail is granted considering the materials on record, strong ground is required to be made for cancellation thereof. No such case is made out by the prosecution. Hence, petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE dn/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court