Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J
PRAJWAL REVANNA – Appellant
Versus
STATE BY CID POLICE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of anticipatory bail petition. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding the delay in filing the complaint. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's reasoning on the commission of alleged acts. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. conclusion on the dismissal of the bail application. (Para 9) |
CAV ORDER
The petitioner/accused No.1 in Crime No.3 of 2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 354A , 354B, 354D and 506 of the IPC and Sections 66E and 67 of the Information Technology Act , 2000 is knocking at the doors of this Court seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., for it having been turned down by the LXXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Criminal Miscellaneous No.6387 of 2024.
2. Heard Sri Prabuling K. Navadgi, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Prof Ravi Varma Kumar, learned senior counsel and Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.
3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:
The subject crime is registered on a complaint filed by the victim, XXXXX on 10-06-2024. The allegation in the complaint is that the victim intended to get her son admitted to a prestigious school in Hassan and in that regard ha
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
