IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH
M.G.UMA
Sagar @ Suresh, S/o. Mallikarjun Shivasharana – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Through The PSI., Zalaki PS., rep. By the Addl. State Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
M.G. UMA, J.
The petitioner being accused No.1 is seeking grant of bail in Crime No.7/2025 of Zalaki police station, Vijayapur district, pending in Criminal Case No.2396/2025 on the file of learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Indi, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103 (1) read with Section 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNS , 2023’).
2. Heard Sri Lagali Raimohan Suresh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State. Perused the materials on record.
3. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
“Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023?”
My answer to the above point is in the ‘Affirmative’ for the following:
REASONS
4. The informant lodged the first information with Zalaki police against accused Nos.1 and 2 alleging that, accused No.2 had lent money to the deceased and in that regard, there was verbal altercation between the deceased and accused No.2 over phone. Following such altercation, the deceased said to have flattened the ty
The court establishes that pre-trial detention requires substantial evidence of intent to justify continued custody; liberty must be safeguarded.
The court emphasized the right to liberty of the accused when no direct evidence links them to the crime.
Bail is established as the rule and jail as the exception, necessitating the court to grant bail under stringent conditions even for serious allegations.
The court granted bail based on the principle of parity, finding no distinguishable role of the petitioner compared to a co-accused already released on bail.
The court grants bail considering the nature of injuries and the completion of investigation, emphasizing that observations are not to influence the trial court.
Bail can be granted even for serious allegations if the injuries are grievous but not life-threatening, and the investigation is complete.
The court granted bail despite serious allegations against co-accused, emphasizing the absence of specific charges against petitioners and the lengthy trial process.
The court determined that the applicant was entitled to bail due to lack of evidence supporting the charges against him.
The court established the entitlement to bail under Section 483, affirming rights against unlawful detention when the investigation is complete and no criminal antecedents are present.
Judicial discretion in bail applications allows for release if no evidence of risk of influencing witnesses or fleeing is presented.
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.