w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Praveena @ Itachi v/s The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Kamakshipalya Police Station, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore


Company & Directors' Information:- REP CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U26921TN2005PTC055138

Company & Directors' Information:- M AND M BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01403KA2012PTC062199

Company & Directors' Information:- G E CO PUBLIC LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U36900WB1951PLC021802

    Criminal Petition No. 3406 of 2020

    Decided On, 27 August 2020

    At, High Court of Karnataka

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

    For the Petitioner: B. Lethif, H.H. Mahalingaiah, Advocates. For the Respondent: Rashmi Jadhav, HCGP.



Judgment Text


(Prayer: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.326/2019 registered by Kamakshipalya Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences p/u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 302 and 120(B) r/w 149 of IPC.)

1. The petitioner who is accused No.2 is seeking to be enlarged on bail in light of his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.326/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 302, 120-B read with Section 149 of IPC.

2. It is the case of the Prosecution that the complaint was lodged by the brother of the deceased and that on 06.09.2019 at about 9.00 p.m. when the complainant had been to Ganapathi Nagar Tempo Stand, at that point of time, he received an information that his brother was assaulted by some unknown persons and that when he went to the second main road of Gajanananagar in Sunkadakatte, he came to know that the dead body of his brother was shifted to Victoria Hospital and then he went to Victoria Hospital and saw the dead body of his brother and noticed the injuries on the dead body. Pursuant to the same, the complaint was lodged on 07.09.2019. The investigation is complete and chargesheet has been filed. The petitioner is in custody since 11.09.2019.

3. It is the case as made out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a complaint was filed initially against unknown persons. It is admitted that even after filing of the chargesheet, there is no eye-witness to the commission of offence. It is further submitted that the case depends on circumstantial evidence and the role of the petitioner is to be established during trial.

4. It is submitted that as per the case made out in the chargesheet, the accused No.3 has assaulted the deceased on his head and when he fell down, accused Nos. 2 to 8 have also assaulted the deceased by weapons, which has finally led to the deceased succumbing to injuries.

5. It is submitted that the other accused who were similarly placed including the accused No.3 have been enlarged on bail and therefore, on the principle of parity noticing that accused Nos.3, 5 to 8 have been enlarged on bail, the petitioner is also entitled for bail.

6. It is further submitted that admittedly accused Nos.3 and 7 despite having criminal antecedents have been enlarged on bail and hence, it is submitted that the petitioner is also entitled for bail. It is further submitted that the recovery has been made only from accused Nos.5, 6, 7 and 8 and that therefore the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

7. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent State submits that the petitioner has been involved in several other cases and has criminal antecedents.

8. Heard both sides.

9. At the outset, it is to be noted that this is a case where there are no direct witnesses who have witnessed the commission of offence. The case rests primarily on the circumstantial evidence. There is no recovery as regards the present accused/petitioner. The recovery has only been from accused Nos.5, 6, 7 and 8. The accused No.3 is enlarged on bail as per the order in Crl.P.No.1534/2020 dated 05.05.2020 and the Court has observed that the role of the accused is a matter to be proved during trial.

10. The case of the prosecution as made out in the chargesheet is that the initial blow on the deceased was by accused No.3 and the accused No.3 has already been enlarged on bail and so also the physical assault on the deceased was by accused Nos.5, 6, 7 and 8, all of whom have also been enlarged on bail. In fact, learned counsel for the petitioner has asserted that the accused Nos.3 and 7 have criminal antecedents. On the principle of parity, the petitioner is similarly placed and that comes out from the imputation as made on this petitioner as well as on accused Nos.3, 5 to 8 as revealed in the chargesheet.

11. Noticing that the accused No.3 has been enlarged on bail in Crime No.1534/2020 and the other accused Nos.5 to 8 have been enlarged on bail as per the order dated 17.06.2020 passed in Crl.P.No.2466/2020 (accused Nos.5 and 8), order dated 08.06.2020 in Crl.P.No.2825/2020 (accused No.9), order dated 04.12.2019 in Crl.P.No.8021/2019 (accused No.11), order dated Crl.P.No.7595/2019 (accused No.6), petitioner is entitled for consideration of his bail application on the principle of parity.

12. Accordingly, in light of the discussion as made above, the petitioner-accused No.2 is also entitled for bail. No doubt, the criminal antecedents is a matter that needs to be taken note of while considering the applications filed seeking to be enlarged on bail. However, merits of the matter would be a supervening consideration while deciding the application relating to enlargement of the accused on bail. If a case as made out against the accused would justify allowing the application, as no sufficient incriminating circumstances are made out in the material placed before the Court, mere criminal antecedents would not justify the Court ignoring the merits of the case. However, to ensure that the petitioner does not threaten the witnesses, stringent conditions could be imposed keeping in mind antecedents of the petitioner.

13. In the present case, noticing that the petitioner has been in custody since 11.09.2019, the present proceedings cannot be termed to be punitive and also noticing the principle of parity, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

14. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.326/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 302, 120-B read with Section 149 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

(ii) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his attendance before the concerned Station H

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

ouse Officer once in a month till the conclusion of trial. (iii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness. (v) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO. (vi) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activities of like nature. (vii) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail. Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

19-10-2020 Manikandan & Others Versus State of Kerala Represented by Public Prosecutor, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
16-10-2020 Mahesh J. Biliye @ Mahesh Biliye Versus Central Bureau of Investigation Anti Corruption Branch, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
16-10-2020 M/s. Khushee Construction through its Power of Attorney Holder, namely Shree Rajeev Kumar, District Patna Versus The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
16-10-2020 Yankappa & Another Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by the Public Prosecutor, Gulbarga High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench OF Kalaburagi
15-10-2020 C. Gopala Krishnan Versus The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Rep. by it's Secretary, TNPSC Road, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
14-10-2020 The Commissioner of Income Tax Karnataka (Central), Bangalore Versus Sadiq Sheikh In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
14-10-2020 C.R. Raju Versus The State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
13-10-2020 N. Shankar Prasad Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department Secretariat, Velagapudi & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
13-10-2020 Gaddi Gangi Reddy Versus The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home Affairs & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
12-10-2020 Naresh Kumar Sinha, Company Secretary, M/s Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Jeevan Bharti, New Delhi & Others Versus Union of India Rep. By The Labour Enforcement Officer Central Tripura West & Another High Court of Gauhati
12-10-2020 Mahasemam Trust, A Public Trust, Rep. by its Trustee, Dr. Prabu Vairavan Prakasam Versus Union of India, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Finance Department, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-10-2020 M/S. Renuka Poultry Farm Rep. By Its Managing Partner, Sri Badraiah, Karnataka Versus M/s. State Bank of India Rep By Its Assistant General Manager A Rajendra Prasad National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
09-10-2020 Environmental Health & Safety Research & Development Centre (EHSRDC), Through its Managing Director, Bangalore & Others Versus Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB), Through its Member Secretary, Bangalore & Others National Green Tribunal Southern Zone Chennai
09-10-2020 Ibrahim Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
09-10-2020 Dr. B.S. Ravikumar Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary (Collegiate Education), Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
09-10-2020 K.G. Jijish Kumar Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala & Others High Court of Kerala
09-10-2020 Akul Bhargava & Others Versus Union Public Service Commission & Others High Court of Delhi
08-10-2020 The Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore & Another Versus M/s. Jundal Aluminium Limited, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
08-10-2020 Franklin & Others Versus State of Kerala Represented by Public Prosecutor, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
08-10-2020 Umapathi Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
08-10-2020 Chand Pasha @ Chanda Versus State by Sargur Police, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
08-10-2020 Aayush Ajit Versus Inspector of Customs Headquarters Preventive Unit (HPU), Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
08-10-2020 C. Rajakumari & Another Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Secretary to Government, Department of Industries (MIA), Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-10-2020 Shivaraju Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
08-10-2020 Ravi Agarwal Versus M/s. Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd., Rep. by its Deputy General Manager, C.D. Kishore High Court of Karnataka
07-10-2020 Nikita Sutar Minor D/o Late Chandra Chetry Sutar @ Chandra Bahadur Sutar, Rep. By Hre Mother/Legal Guardian Smti Manju Devi @ Manju Sutar, Assam Versus The State of Assam & Others High Court of Gauhati
07-10-2020 M/s. Thamraparni Enterprises, Rep. by its Partner K.S. Sundaram Versus M/s. Simpson and Company Ltd., Rep. by its Deputy General Manager, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-10-2020 Yathish Kumar @ Yathish Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by Public Prosecutor, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
06-10-2020 Gangandharan Nair Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
06-10-2020 State of kerala, Rep. by Tahsildar, Kothamangalam Versus The Secretary, Nirmalgram Vannith Dairy Central Society Keerampara, Kothamangalam & Others High Court of Kerala
05-10-2020 A. Mohammed Ataulla & Others Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by the SPP, Bangalore & Another High Court of Karnataka
05-10-2020 Parul Majumdar Laskar & Others Versus The Union of India to Be Rep. By The Secy., Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi & Others High Court of Gauhati
05-10-2020 M/s. CEE DEE Yes IT Parks Ltd., Rep. By its Managing Director, Chennai Versus The Reserve Bank of India, Department of Banking Supervision, Represented by its Chief General manager-in-charge, Mumbai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-10-2020 Sreekumar Versus State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 K.S. Muhammed Nazim & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Kochi & Others High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 K.S. Muhammed Nazim & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Kochi & Others High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 Ujwala Prasad & Others Versus New India Assurance Company Ltd., Rep. by Division Manager & Others High Court of Karnataka
01-10-2020 Ujwala Prasad & Others Versus New India Assurance Company Ltd., Rep. by Division Manager & Others High Court of Karnataka
01-10-2020 Naveen Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by SPP, Dharwad & Another High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
01-10-2020 Mohammed Shariff Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
01-10-2020 Mohammed Shariff Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
01-10-2020 Mohammed Rafiq Saikalgar & Others Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
01-10-2020 Raheesh Babu Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 Raheesh Babu Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
01-10-2020 The State of Nagaland Represented by the Public Prosecutor, Nagaland Versus Ripu Daman Singh High Court of Gauhati
30-09-2020 Dr. Seethalakshmi & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, Kochi High Court of Kerala
30-09-2020 G.D. Harakumar & Others Versus The Commissioner of Police, Represented by its Special Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
30-09-2020 G.D. Harakumar & Others Versus The Commissioner of Police, Represented by its Special Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
29-09-2020 Yallappa Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented By Addl. State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad & Another High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Lloyd Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by The State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Mohammed Shoaib Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Mohammed Shoaib Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Yashwanth @ Yashavant Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Addl. State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
29-09-2020 Tabu Ram Pegu Versus The State of Assam, Rep. By The PP, Assam & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-09-2020 Malathi @ Maluruthamma & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by Learned State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
29-09-2020 Malathi @ Maluruthamma & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by Learned State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka
29-09-2020 Kore Raju Versus The State of Telangana being rep., by its Special Chief Secretary, Revenue (Excise) Department, Secretariat & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
28-09-2020 T.U. Roopesh Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
28-09-2020 M.E. Shajith, Versus State of Kerala, Ernakulam, Represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
28-09-2020 Commissioner of Income Tax Karnataka (Central) Bangalore, Controlling Office of Central Circle, Panaji Versus M/s. Mukhtar Minerals Private Limited In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
25-09-2020 Sandeep Gururaj Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
25-09-2020 Somashekara & Another Versus State by Range Forest Officer, Represented by SPP, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
25-09-2020 B.K. Naveenkumar Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by SPP, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
25-09-2020 Asi (Steno) Hrishikesh Das Versus The State of Assam Rep. By The Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt of Assam & Others High Court of Gauhati
25-09-2020 Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited, (Presently NLC India Limited), Rep. by its General Manager (Contracts) Corporate Office, Neyveli Versus M/s. TENOVA India Pvt. Ltd., Alwarpet & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-09-2020 Mallappa & Another Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
24-09-2020 N. Nagesh Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
24-09-2020 Janak Bishu Karma Versus State of Goa, Through the Public Prosecutor, Panaji Goa In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
24-09-2020 Raghavan & Another Versus State of Kerala Rep. by Chief Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
24-09-2020 Bimal Chandra Deori & Another Versus The State Of Assam Represented By The Commissioner And Secy. To The Govt. Of Assam, Public Enterprises Deptt., Dispur, Guwahati & Others High Court of Gauhati
24-09-2020 State of Kerala, Represented by The Assistant Labour Officer, Munnar, Through The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam Versus Annakutty Varghese, Proprietress, M/s. Misha Holiday Home, Munnar High Court of Kerala
24-09-2020 Yogesh Agarwal & Others Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. herein by: The Investigation Officer Cyber Crime Police Station (CID), Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
24-09-2020 Ani & Others Versus State of Kerala, Rep. by The Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala & Another High Court of Kerala
23-09-2020 Tousif Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Addl. State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad & Another High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
23-09-2020 Nagalakshmi (died) & Another Versus Sivaprakasam, Rep.by his Power Agent and his wife Senthamil Selvi High Court of Judicature at Madras
23-09-2020 Rajegowda @ Guruswamy & Another Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, Bangalore & Another High Court of Karnataka
23-09-2020 Maharudragouda Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Ranebennur Town Police, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
23-09-2020 C.M. Gadha & Another Versus Bar Council of India, New Delhi, Rep. by Its Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
23-09-2020 Munsiffulla Khan Versus State by Dobbaspete Police Station, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
23-09-2020 Heer A. Rajani, Rep. by her Power of Attorney Amit M. Rajani Versus M.M. Syed Sikkander, Proprietor: M/s. Syed Bearing Centre, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-09-2020 Jervasio Pereira Versus State Through Public Prosecutor, High Court of Bombay at Goa & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
22-09-2020 Ramesh Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
22-09-2020 Ajgar Ali @ Rohil Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
22-09-2020 Prabhakar @ Uday Versus State by SHO, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
22-09-2020 Akshay Kumar Jaiswal Versus The State of Assam, Rep. By The PP, Assam & Another High Court of Gauhati
21-09-2020 Saraswati Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Dharwad High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
21-09-2020 Jantra Wanida & Others Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by SPP, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
21-09-2020 Shivanand Versus The State of Karnataka, Rep. by its Secretary Dept. of Revenue, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
21-09-2020 Dr. B. Chandrashekara Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary Education Department (Collegiate Education), Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
21-09-2020 Yellappa Versus The Management of NWKRTC, Rep. by its Divisional Controller, Gadag High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
19-09-2020 National Investigation Agency Chikoti Garden, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Rep. by A.G. Kaiser Versus Vinay Talekar & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
18-09-2020 Sarath Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
18-09-2020 Libin Salas Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
18-09-2020 M/s. Standard Metalloys Private Limited, through its Authorised Signatory Sumit Tripathi Versus Union of India Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Mines & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
18-09-2020 B. Ramamoorthy & Another Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-09-2020 Thankappan Pillai Versus State of Kerala, Rep. by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
17-09-2020 Mahasamy Versus Minor Prakash, Rep. By his father & natural guardian Rajendran, Tiruppur & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-09-2020 Rajesh & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
17-09-2020 Sasidharan Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
17-09-2020 Vangamudi Kasimayan, Kurnool DT. Versus State of AP., rep PP. High Court of Andhra Pradesh