Shri. Santosh Dattatray Jamune vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 1863 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

                         BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
              CRL.A.NO.100049 OF 2022
BETWEEN

SHRI. SANTOSH DATTATRAY JAMUNE
AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. PVT. WORK,
R/O. NESARI VILLAGE,
TAL. GADHINGLAJ AND DIST: KOLHAPUR,
MAHARASHTRA STATE
                                             ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.VISHWANATH BADIGER, ADVOCATE)

AND
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, AT. DHAWAD,
THROUGH YAMAKANMARADI PS

2 . SRI. YALLAPPA SIDDARAI HOSATTI
AGE. MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUTYANATTI,
TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI.
                                           ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.VIJAY S. KALASURMATH, HCGP)

      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14 A(2) OF SC/ST
(PA) ACT 1989., SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND
ENLARGE THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.14 ON BAIL IN CRIME
NO.49/2019 REGISTERED BY YAMAKANAMARADI POLICE
STATION, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 143, 147, 148,
341, 307, 504, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(1) (r) (s)
OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 2014 AND SECTION
25(A) (1) OF INDIAN ARMS ACT 1959.
                               2




    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                       JUDGMENT

Learned HCGP takes notice for respondent

no.1-State.

2. This appeal is preferred by the

appellant praying to enlarge him on

anticipatory bail in Crime No.49/2019 of

Yamakanmardi Police Station registered for the

offence punishable under Sections 302, 504,

506 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

3. Charge sheet has been filed for offence

punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341,

307, 504, 506 R/W Section 149 OF IPC and

under Sections 3(i)(r)(s) of SC/ST(POA) Act,

1989 and Section 25(A)(1) of Arms Act,1959.

4. Appeal is preferred under Section

14A(2) of SC/ST(POA) Act 1989. The material

on record shows that learned Sessions Judge

was pleased to enlarge the appellant on

anticipatory bail in Crl. Misc.No.528/2021 vide

order dated 28.05.2021. It appears that the

appellant failed to comply the directions issued

by the learned Sessions Judge to appear before

the jurisdictional Court within the time

stipulated therein and subsequently, NBW came

to be issued against him. The appellant once

again filed a petition under Section 438 of

Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Court in Crl.

Misc.No.1396/2021 which is dismissed on

03.01.2022. The said order does not suffer

from any illegality, since granting anticipatory

bail once again does not arise. The appellant

has not approached the Sessions Court seeking

modification of the order or for extension of

time to appear before the jurisdictional Court,

assigning reasons for his non-compliance. The

Present appeal does not merit any

consideration. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

HMB