A Division Bench of SC while setting aside the impugned judgment of HC releasing accused on bail has held that, HC must consider the gravity of offence before granting bail for the offence under Sections 120(B), 302, 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27(3) of the Arms Act, 1959.
Facts
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment(s) passed by the High Court of Karnataka by which the High Court has allowed the said criminal petitions preferred by the accused Subrahmanya 1 and Rajesh (respondent No. 1 in the respective appeals) and has directed to release the accused Subrahmanya and Rajesh on bail in connection with the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 302, 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27(3) of the Arms Act, 1959. Hence, the original complainant has preferred the present appeals.
Contention Made
Appellant: That while directing the accused respondent No. 1 in the respective appeals to be released on bail, the High Court has not at all considered the gravity of the offences. It is submitted that the High Court has not at all considered the fact that in the present case that there are two eyewitnesses and respondent No. 1 – accused has been identified.
Court Observation
The Divisions Bench of SC observed that the High Court has acquitted the accused. The observations made by the High Court are based on surmises and conjectures and the High Court has observed that there might have been the chances of the witnesses showing them the accused before the T.I. Parade. The fact remains that the accused have been identified.
Court Judgment
SC while allowing the present appeal has held that , The High Court has not at all considered the gravity of the offence while releasing the respondent No.1 accused on bail .
However, High Court releasing the accused Subrahmanya and Rajesh, respondent No. 1 in the respective appeals on bail in connection with the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 302, 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27(3) of the Arms Act, 1959 are hereby quashed and set aside.
Case: Joseph Johnson N Maithkuri vs Subrahmanya & Another
Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1439 OF & NO. 1440 OF 2022
Bench: Hon’ble Justice M.R. Shah & Justice Krishna Murariu
Decided on: 9th September, 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
