SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dr. M Shyam vs State Of Karnataka By on 9 April, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9th DAY OF APRIL, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRL.P NO. 2497 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

DR. M SHYAM
S/O LATE MANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT NO 41/42 B 6TH CROSS
VEERA SAGARA MAIN ROAD
AMBA BHAVANI STREET
ATTUR LAYOUT, YELAHANKA
BANGALORE – 560064
… PETITIONER

(BY SRI:VISHNUMURTHY, ADV)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
AMRUTHHALLI P S BANGALORE
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH Court OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE – 560001
… RESPONDENT

(BY SRI:S VISHWA MURTHY, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C
PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.115/2017 OF
2

AMRUTHAHALLY POLICE STATION, BANGALORE CITY FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A AND 506 OF
IPC.

THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The

petitioner and his mother approached the Sessions Court by

filing Crl.Misc.No.1351/2017 seeking interim anticipatory bail.

At initial stage on 17.02.2017, the Sessions Court granted

interim anticipatory bail. Again, it was extended on

13.07.2017. At a subsequent stage, while deciding the

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition on merits, the Sessions Court

dismissed the petition making certain observations at

paragraph No.9 of its order. Therefore, the petitioner is

before this court.

2. A complaint is registered for the offence

punishable under Sections 498A, 506 read with 34 of IPC.

The allegation is that the petitioner used to harass his wife.
3

3. It is now submitted by the learned High Court

Government Pleader that the Magistrate issued summons to

the petitioner after charge sheet was filed. Therefore, the

petitioner has approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail

apprehending arrest. He also submits that ordinarily if once

the Magistrate issues summons, the accused will not be taken

to custody.

4. In the above circumstances, I am of the opinion

that especially when the petitioner had the benefit of interim

anticipatory bail and the same is shown in the charge sheet,

the apprehension expressed by the petitioner that he will be

taken to custody once he appears before the Magistrate is

unfounded. Ordinarily, no Magistrate takes accused to

custody once he responds to summons and promptly appears

before the Court.

5. In this view of the matter, I do not find that the

fear expressed by the petitioner that he will be taken to

custody can be considered to grant anticipatory bail. The

petitioner is at liberty to appear before the Magistrate and
4

apply for bail. The Magistrate shall consider the same in

accordance with law.

The petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

*bgn/-

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Rules of Group, If You agree then Message us on Above Number.

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh