H. P. SANDESH
Ashoka S/o. Late baba – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail of the petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.313/2021 of Hunusur Rural Police Station, Mysuru District, which is numbered as S.C.No.76/2022 on committal and the offences invoked against him under Sections 120-B, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. This is a successive bail petition. Earlier after filing of the charge-sheet both accused Nos.1 and 2 have approached this Court seeking for regular bail, the same has been considered on merits vide order dated 20.06.2022 in Crl.P.No.4072/2022.
3. The present petition is a successive bail petition filed by accused No.2, wherein, it is contended that the motive is attributed to accused No.1 only that he had illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased. According to CW-5, accused No.1 said to have called the deceased to his land by phone on 27.11.2021 and not by this petitioner. The allegation is also that accused No.1 said to have assaulted with club on head, which is the possible view of cause for death and no overt act is attributed to this petitioner. The recovery of dead body is not at the instance of this petitioner or accused No.1 because the plac
Babu Singh and others v. State of U.P. reported in (1978) 1 SCC 579
Dinubhai Boghabhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat and others reported in (2014) 4 SCC 626
Dataram Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22
Lt. Col. Prasad Shrikant Purohit v. State of Maharashtra reported in (2018) 11 SCC 458
Makhan Singh v. State of Punjab reported in AIR 1988 SC 1705
State of Haryana v. Jagbir Singh and another reported in (2003) 11 SCC 261
Sukhvinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab reported in (1994) 5 SCC 152
In cases where accused persons are alleged to have shared a common intention under Section 149 of IPC, individual roles may not be required to be considered for granting bail.
Point of Law : No material is collected against this petitioner cannot be accepted when he was part of the unlawful assembly and accompanied with deadly weapons and assailants. [Para 17]
The court affirmed that in serious offenses, circumstantial evidence and severity of potential punishment must prevail in bail considerations, denying the petitioner's release amid serious accusation....
A subsequent bail application can only be considered if there is a material change in circumstances; absence of such change upholds previous bail rejections.
In double murder cases punishable by death, bail denied where prima facie circumstantial evidence establishes involvement, despite trial delay, emphasizing gravity of offence and punishment severity.
(1) Bail – Object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative – Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that accused person will stand his trial when ....
The court determined that prolonged detention does not automatically entitle an accused to bail when substantial evidence of guilt exists, underscoring the rights to a speedy trial within serious cri....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.