IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Mohammad Nawaz
Riyaz M.H. @ Nisar, S/O Hamza – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka Through The Sub Inspector Of Police Mulki Police Station – Respondent
ORDER :
Mohammad Nawaz, J.
This petition under Section 483 of BNSS , 2023 is preferred by accused No.5, to enlarge him on bail in SC No.47/2021 pending on the file of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, DK, Mangaluru, arising out of Cr.No.38/2020 of Mulki Police Station, Mangalore City.
2. Heard the learned Senior counsel Sri P.P.Hegde appearing for the counsel on record for petitioner, Ms. Asma Kousar, learned Addl. SPP for the State and perused the material on record.
3. At the out set, it is relevant to mention that this is the fifth petition in which the petitioner is seeking bail. On three occasions, bail petitions were withdrawn and one more petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.
4. This petition is presented seeking grant of bail to the petitioner, mainly on the ground of parity and long incarceration of the petitioner in custody. Further, on the ground that the witnesses examined before the trial Court have not divulged the role of the petitioner etc.
5. The contention of the learned Senior counsel can be summarized as under:
i. Out of the 10 accused chargesheeted, accused Nos.1, 6, 7, 9 and 10 are already enlarged on bail, out of them, accused No.7 is similarly plac
Bail applications must consider the distinct roles of accused individuals, particularly in serious crimes, prioritizing gravity and witness safety over parity or prolonged incarceration.
Bail application denied due to strong evidence against the petitioner, emphasizing distinct involvement in a murder characterized as an ‘Honour Killing.’
The principle of parity in bail applications requires careful consideration of the accused's specific role and circumstances, rather than being an absolute basis for granting bail.
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....
Bail for accused involved in heinous crimes requires careful assessment of individual roles and public safety, with parity not considered if roles differ significantly.
The court cannot grant bail on the ground of parity if the specific overt acts and the severity of the injuries sustained do not warrant bail.
Under UA(P) Act Section 43D(5), bail denied if charge-sheet shows prima facie true accusations of terrorist gang involvement; custody/delay insufficient absent changed circumstances; parity only for ....
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 necessitates granting bail when material witnesses have been examined, irrespective of the seriousness of the crime.
Bail under the U.A.P. Act requires prima facie assessment of allegations; long custody or parity with co-accused do not automatically justify release.
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.