SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Krishna Nayaka vs State By Anekal Police Station, on 23 January, 2020

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRIMINAL PETITION No.8909 OF 2018

BETWEEN

Krishna Nayaka,
Son of Late Sakariya Nayaka @
Dhooma Nayaka,
Aged about 40 years,
R/at Bangala Doddi Village,
Kasaba Hobli, Anekal-Taluk-562106,
Bengaluru-Rural-District.
…Petitioner
(By Sri. C.N.Raju, Advocate for
Smt. K.Subbalakshmamma, Advocate)

AND

State by Anekal-Police Station
Rep. by State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Building,
Bengaluru – 560001.
…Respondent
(By Sri. K.Nageshwarappa, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439
Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
Cr.No.123/2007 of Anekal Police Station Bengaluru City for
the offence punishable under Section 304-B, 306 read with
Section 34 of IPC and Section 3, 4 6 of D.P.Act.
2

This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following :

ORDER

Heard the petitioner’s counsel and the learned High

Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.

2. This is a petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.,

by the petitioner/accused No.1. He is facing trial in

relation to offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B,

306 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of

D.P.Act.

3. The petitioner has moved this Court on earlier

occasion by filing Crl.P.No.2157/2018 and it was dismissed

for non compliance of office objections.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner had been enlarged on bail by the Sessions

Court and because of he jumped the bail conditions, he

was arrested and has been in custody for the last two

years. He also submits that the other accused have
3

already been acquitted. For these reasons the petitioner be

released on bail by imposing stringent conditions.

5. Learned High Court Government Pleader

opposes the bail petition by submitting that for about ten

years the petitioner had been absconded. This very much

shows that he has not co-operated with the trial Court in

completion of trial. There are no grounds to allow this

petition.

6. The order of the Sessions Court clearly

indicates that for ten years the petitioner had remained

absconded without appearing before the Court. He was

arrested on 03.02.2018. It is the duty of the

accused/petitioner who is enlarged on bail to appear

regularly before the Court to see that the trial is completed

at the earliest. There is no guarantee that he will appear

before the Court again if he is released on bail. Merely

because the other accused have been acquitted, it cannot

be a ground for granting bail to the petitioner. The

petitioner who is the main accused; I do not think that this
4

petition deserves to be allowed. Hence petition is

dismissed.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Kmv*

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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 read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation