Mr Mithun T vs State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 12253 Kant

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 30 T H DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

                        BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

       CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7265 OF 2022

BETWEEN:

Mr. Mithun T.,
S/o. Late Thammaiah,
Aged about 27 years,
Resid ent of Bilalkoppa,
Aduvalli Villag e, N.R.Pura Taluk,
Chikkamag aluru District-577201.
                                           ...Petitioner
(By Sri P.P.Hegde, Sr. Counsel for
    Sri Venkatesh Somaredd i, Advocate)


AND:

State of Karnataka,
By Balehonnur Police,
Represented by
State Pub lic Prosecutor,
High Court of Karnataka,
Beng aluru-560001.
                                          ...Respondent
(By Sri K.Nag eshwarapp a, HCGP)


     This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439
Cr.P.C. p raying to enlarg e the petitioner on bail in
Cr.No.102/2019    registered   by    Balehonnur Police
Station, Chikkamag aluru for the offence p/u/s 302 of
IPC, p ending on the file of II Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Chikkamag aluru in S.C.No.11/2020.
                              :: 2 ::


     This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this
day, the Court mad e the following :

                             ORDER

This is a successive bail application by the

accused. His earlier application Criminal Petition

3354/2020 was withdrawn when this court

expressed an opinion that there was no case for

granting bail.

2. Now, Sri P.P.Hegde, learned senior

counsel, for the appellant submits that out of 35

witnesses cited in the charge sheet, 4 witnesses

have been examined. The petitioner has been in

custody for the last three years. It is a case

based on circumstantial evidence and in this view

the petitioner may be released on bail. He also

submits that in case this court finds that bail

cannot be granted, the trial court may be directed

to expedite the trial within a time frame. He

places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme :: 3 ::

Court in the case of Hussain and Another vs

Union of India [(2017) 5 SCC 702].

3. Learned Government Pleader opposes the

petition and submits that CW11 is an important

witness. Before him the deceased revealed the

cause of death. If bail is granted at this stage,

there is possibility that the witnesses may be

influenced.

4. The petitioner is facing trial for the offence

under section 302 IPC. If he has been in custody

for the last three years, it cannot be a ground

because the minimum sentence to be imposed is

life imprisonment. Though 4 witnesses have been

examined, there are some more witnesses to be

examined by the prosecution. Therefore I do not

find any good ground to admit the petitioner to

bail.

:: 4 ::

5. As requested by Sri P.P.Hegde, the trial

court cannot be directed to complete trial within a

time frame because any direction issued by this

court will hamper the trial of old cases. However,

the trial court may decide the case as early as

possible subject to cooperation by the deceased.

Sd/-

JUDGE

ckl/-