High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused No.5 in Murder Case on Parity with Co-Accused Who Were Not Assailants. The Court held that since the petitioner's role of providing protection was identical to that of co-accused Nos.6 and 7 who were granted bail, the petitioner was entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 13
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Abhishek @ Abhi, accused No.5 in Crime No.172/2019 registered at Ulsoor Police Station, Bengaluru, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 24(1)(b)(b) and 25(1)(B)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959, filed a criminal petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking bail. The case involved the murder of a deceased person, where accused Nos.1 to 4 were the actual assailants who caused the death. Accused Nos.5 to 7 were alleged to have surrounded the assailants to provide protection and prevent anyone from rescuing the deceased. The investigation was completed and a charge sheet had been filed. The petitioner's counsel argued that accused Nos.6 and 7, who had similar roles, had been granted bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.2460/2020, and therefore the petitioner should be granted bail on the ground of parity. The Court perused the order granting bail to accused Nos.6 and 7 and noted that they were not assailants. Since the petitioner's role was identical to that of the bailed co-accused, the Court found no reason to deny bail to the petitioner. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on bail subject to certain conditions.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Bail - Section 439 CrPC - Parity - The petitioner, accused No.5, sought bail on the ground that co-accused Nos.6 and 7, who had similar roles of providing protection and not being assailants, were granted bail by the same Court. The Court held that since the petitioner's role was identical to that of the bailed co-accused, he was entitled to bail on parity. (Paras 2-4)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner, accused No.5, is entitled to bail on the ground of parity with accused Nos.6 and 7 who were granted bail by this Court, given that the petitioner's role was similar to that of the bailed co-accused.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on such terms and conditions as the trial court may impose.

Law Points

  • Bail
  • Parity
  • Section 439 CrPC
  • Section 302 IPC
  • Section 34 IPC
  • Arms Act
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 32

Criminal Petition No.2388 of 2020

2020-07-01

Sreenivas Harish Kumar

Sri. D.Nataraj (for petitioner), Sri. K.S.Abhijith, HCGP (for respondent)

Abhishek @ Abhi

The State of Karnataka

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal bail petition under Section 439 CrPC

Remedy Sought

Enlargement of the petitioner on bail in Crime No.172/2019

Filing Reason

Petitioner, accused No.5, sought bail on the ground of parity with co-accused Nos.6 and 7 who were granted bail

Previous Decisions

Co-accused Nos.6 and 7 were granted bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.2460/2020

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail on the ground of parity with co-accused who have been granted bail

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel submitted that investigation is completed and charge sheet filed; accused Nos.1 to 4 caused death; accused Nos.5 to 7 gave protection; accused Nos.6 and 7 have been granted bail by this Court; therefore on parity bail may be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

Where co-accused with similar role have been granted bail, the petitioner is entitled to bail on the ground of parity, especially when the petitioner is not an assailant.

Judgment Excerpts

Having regard to the fact that the accused Nos.6 and 7 were not assailants and this Court has granted bail to them, it may be stated that the petitioner is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity.

Procedural History

The petitioner, accused No.5, filed a bail petition under Section 439 CrPC before the High Court of Karnataka. The petition was heard on 01.07.2020 and allowed.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 439
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 120-B, 34
  • Arms Act, 1959: 24(1)(b)(b), 25(1)(B)(b)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused No.5 in Murder Case on Parity with Co-Accused Who Were Not Assailants. The Court held that since the petitioner's role of providing protection was identical to that of co-accused Nos.6 and 7 who were gra...
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case — 30% Contributory Negligence Deduction Set Aside. Claimants Entitled to Recover Full Compensation from Insurance Company of Joint Tortfeasor Under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.