IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
Mr. Mohammad Razim, S/o. M.K. Mahammed – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Through Mulki Police Station, Represented By SPP High Court Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
(S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J.)
1. Accused No.7 in S.C.No.47/2021 pending before the Court of VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru arising out of Crime No.38/2020 registered by the Mulki Police Station, Mangaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 114, 109, 120B, 341, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC, is before this Court in this successive bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. FIR in Crime No.38/2020 was registered by Mulki Police Station, Mangaluru, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 341, 307, 302, 395 read with Section 149 of IPC against one Davood Hakeem and others based on first information dated 05.06.2020 received from Imran, son of the deceased. During the course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested on 06.06.2020. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed against ten persons and petitioner is arraigned as accused No.7 in the charge sheet. Bail application filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional Sessions Court was initially allowed and the said order was questioned by the defacto com
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 necessitates granting bail when material witnesses have been examined, irrespective of the seriousness of the crime.
The court emphasized the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, stating that prolonged detention without trial can justify grant of bail even for serious offences.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution necessitates granting bail when the prosecution's progress is insufficient, even for serious offenses.
An accused's right to a speedy trial enhances their entitlement to bail when trial proceedings are excessively delayed, irrespective of the gravity of the offences charged.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 necessitates granting bail if prolonged detention occurs without substantive progress in proceedings.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is paramount, and prolonged custody without trial can warrant the granting of bail.
Bail applications must consider the distinct roles of accused individuals, particularly in serious crimes, prioritizing gravity and witness safety over parity or prolonged incarceration.
Grant of Bail - Trial is in progress and if such findings are allowed to stand it would seriously prejudice the prosecution case. At the stage of granting of bail, the court can only go into the ques....
The court granted bail due to lengthy custody, similarity of allegations with a co-accused who received bail, and lack of evidence suggesting witness tampering.
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.