Back
K. NATARAJAN
H. Mahesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1, 2 and 5 under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. for granting anticipatory bail in Crime No.148/2022 registered by the Thalaghattapura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sec. 306 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and learned counsel Dr.Prajwal K. Aradhya, who assisted the learned High Court Government Pleader.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint lodged by one Poornima alleging that she got married to Girish on 20/6/2002 and was having a son by name Arya Rajath, aged about 19 years. Her husband was having two wine stores and a Bar. The accused persons were the mother, brothers and sisters of her husband. Accused No.1-mahesh, who is the brother of her husband was looking after the wine store situated in Akshyanagar and later on accused No.1 demanded to give the wine store to himself which was refused by her husband. Her son, who was studying in PUC was interested in taking the wine store business and in that regard he used to visit his Uncle's wine store and used to help his uncle. Subsequently, ther
Granting anticipatory bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The court considered the remote role of the petitioners in the alleged instigation to commit suicide and granted them anticipatory bail.
The demand for repayment of a loan amount does not amount to abetment or instigation under Section 306 of IPC.
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
