Back
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
Dnyaneshwar – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 challenging the order dtd. 20/4/2022 passed in Spl.C . No.24/2022 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot, whereunder the bail application of the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 sought in Crime No.6/2022 of Lokapur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sec. 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC', for brevity) and Sec. 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention o f Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'SC & ST (POA) Act' , for brevity), came to be rejected.
2. ***
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State . Inspite of service of notice , respondent No .2 has not appeared either in person or through counsel.
4. The case of the prosecution is that, one Subhash has lodged the complaint on 12 .01.2022 at 14.30 hours stating that accused No .1 is a sugarcane cutting gangman, accused No.2 is the brother and accused No.3 is his nephew. About two years back, deceased had taken advance of Rs.1 ,60,000.00 from accused No .1 stating that he will engage hims
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of circumstantial evidence, dying declaration, and the nature of injuries in deciding the validity of a bail application in a cas....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of circumstantial evidence and the necessity of physical custody in determining the grant of bail.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need to balance individual liberty with achieving justice, especially when considering bail in cases based on circumstantial evidence.
The court granted bail based on the appellant's custody duration and the release of similarly situated co-accused, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The main legal point established is that without a prima facie case, a petition for anticipatory bail can be entertained, and the potential impact on the investigation and witnesses should be conside....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to carefully consider the strength of the prosecution's case, especially when based on circumstantial evidence, and to ensure the proper a....
The court emphasized the principle of parity in bail applications, allowing bail when co-accused with similar roles have been granted bail, highlighting the absence of evidence suggesting tampering.
Cancellation of bail – There is clear distinction between cancellation of bail on the considerations provided under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. and reversal of order of bail by superior Court.
The seriousness of the offence, the presence of supporting witnesses, and the vulnerability of the complainant and other witnesses influenced the decision to deny bail to the appellant.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
