Sri Srikanth vs State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 5227 Kant

                              1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                            BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

       CRIMINAL PETITION No.5922 OF 2021

BETWEEN

Mr. Srikanth,
S/o Krishnappa,
Aged about 30 years,
Residing at Nagamangala,
Military Hotel Road,
Near Acharya College,
Andrahalli, Bengaluru-560068.
                                              ...Petitioner
(By Sri K.Vijaya Kumar, Advocate)

AND

State of Karnataka
By Tavarekere Police,
Represented by
High Court Government Pleader,
High Court Compound,
Bengaluru-560001.
                                            ...Respondent
(By Sri B.J.Rohith, HCGP)

      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482
Cr.P.C praying to set aside the order dated 15.07.2021
(vide Annexure-A) passed by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District at Bengaluru in
C.C.No.2254/2019 and direct the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District at Bengaluru to send
                               2


the release intimation to the Jail authorities for the release
of the petitioner.

       This Criminal Petition coming on for admission this
day, the court made the following:


                          ORDER

I have heard the petitioner's counsel Sri K.Vijaya

Kumar and the learned High Court Government

Pleader.

2. The facts are that the petitioner suffered a

judgment of conviction in C.C.2254/2019 for the

offences under sections 454 and 383 IPC. The learned

trial Judge sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of two years for each

offence and directed that the sentence should run

concurrently.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has

been in custody since 9.11.2018. The judgment of

conviction was passed on 8.4.2021 and by that time

he had spent two years in the jail. He was not

released. He made an application in the trial court

seeking his release, but the learned Judge of the trial

court passed an order on 16.7.2021 rejecting the

application stating that the period of imprisonment

was not over.

4. The facts disclose that by the time the

judgment of conviction was pronounced by the trial

court on 8.4.2021, the petitioner had completed two

years period of imprisonment. The judgment of

conviction clearly shows that the sentence of

imprisonment for both the offences should run

concurrently. The mistake the trial court committed

was that it did not extend the benefit of set off that

the petitioner is entitled to in accordance with law.

The impugned order does not disclose as to on what

basis the trial court could come to a conclusion that

the period of sentence was not over. Since it is very

clear that the petitioner has already completed two

years in jail, he has to be released. In this view,

petition is allowed. The impugned order dated

16.7.2021 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Bengaluru Rural District, in C.C. 2254/2019 is set

aside. The petitioner shall be set at liberty forthwith if

he is not required in any other case.

SD/-

JUDGE

ckl