High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused in Murder Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence and COVID-19 Delay. Petitioner's name not in FIR, implicated solely on co-accused statement; trial stalled due to pandemic.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Sri Harish Reddy, filed a second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in Crime No.15/2019 of Kota Police Station, Udupi, for offences under Sections 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 449, 342, 504, 323, 324, 506, 307, 302, 212 and 201 read with Section 149 IPC. His earlier bail petition was rejected on 02.12.2019 in Criminal Petition No.7308/2019. The petitioner's counsel argued that an important ground was omitted earlier: the petitioner's name was not in the FIR and he was implicated solely based on the statement of accused No.1, thus no prima facie material exists. Additionally, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the trial has stalled with no prospects of early conclusion. The court considered these submissions and held that in the absence of prima facie material, continued detention is not justified, and the delay due to COVID-19 further supports bail. The court allowed the petition and directed the petitioner to be released on bail on certain conditions.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Bail - Section 439 Cr.P.C. - Prima Facie Case - Petitioner's name not in FIR, implicated solely on statement of accused No.1 - Held that in the absence of prima facie material, continued detention is not justified (Paras 2-3).

B) Criminal Procedure Code - Bail - COVID-19 Pandemic - Delay in Trial - Trial stalled due to pandemic - Held that prolonged incarceration without trial prospects entitles petitioner to bail (Para 2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. when his name was not in the FIR and he was implicated solely on the statement of co-accused, and considering the delay due to COVID-19.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Petition allowed. Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the trial court may impose.

Law Points

  • Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
  • Prima facie case
  • Implication based on co-accused statement
  • COVID-19 pandemic as ground for bail
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 210

Criminal Petition No.2668 of 2020

2020-07-03

Justice John Michael Cunha

Sri T. Prakash (for petitioner), Sri Thejesh P., HCGP (for respondent)

Sri Harish Reddy

State of Karnataka

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

Nature of Litigation

Criminal bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner seeks enlargement on bail in Crime No.15/2019 of Kota Police Station.

Filing Reason

Petitioner's earlier bail petition was rejected; new grounds include name not in FIR and COVID-19 delay.

Previous Decisions

Earlier bail petition rejected on 02.12.2019 in Criminal Petition No.7308/2019.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail when his name was not in the FIR and he was implicated solely on the statement of co-accused. Whether the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent delay in trial constitute grounds for bail.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's name not shown in FIR; implicated solely on statement of accused No.1, no prima facie material. Trial stalled due to COVID-19, no prospects of early conclusion. Petitioner's mother is ailing and aged more than 70 years.

Ratio Decidendi

In the absence of prima facie material, continued detention is not justified. Delay in trial due to COVID-19 pandemic also entitles the petitioner to bail.

Judgment Excerpts

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an important ground was omitted to be urged during hearing of the first application, that is, the name of the petitioner was not shown in the FIR and that he was implicated solely on the basis of the statement of accused No.1 and as such, there is no prima-facie material to sustain charges against the petitioner. Secondly, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that having regard to the present situation, on account of covid-19, the trial has come to stand-still. There is no prospects of the trial being concluded in the near future.

Procedural History

FIR registered as Crime No.15/2019 at Kota Police Station. Petitioner filed first bail petition (Criminal Petition No.7308/2019) which was rejected on 02.12.2019. Petitioner then filed second bail petition (Criminal Petition No.2668/2020) which was allowed on 03.07.2020.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.): 439
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 449, 342, 504, 323, 324, 506, 307, 302, 212, 201, 149
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Specific Performance Suit — Agreement to Sell Not Proved and Suit Barred by Limitation. Plaintiff failed to prove execution of agreement and suit was filed beyond three years from notice of refusal under Articl...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused in Murder Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence and COVID-19 Delay. Petitioner's name not in FIR, implicated solely on co-accused statement; trial stalled due to pandemic.