R. Madhusudhan vs State Of Karnataka
- SCC(2017) 14 SCC 233
- Neutral2017 INSC 694
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a High Court has set aside anticipatory bail granted by a Trial Court in view of Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and an appeal has been admitted to the Supreme Court with the order of stay continuing the protection granted by the Trial Court, the appellate court should dispose of the appeal by directing the appellants to surrender and seek regular bail from the Trial Court, rather than adjudicating the question of anticipatory bail on the merits, leaving the question of bail to be determined by the Trial Court upon surrender.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1298 OF 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) No.9813/2016)
R.MADHUSUDHAN ...Appellant
VS.
STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. ...Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1299 OF 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) No.9845/2016)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants before this Court were aggrieved by
the denial of anticipatory bail. They are the accused in
Crime No.280/2015 and Crime No.169/2015 before the Court
of II Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at
Bangalore, who by orders dated 2nd July, 2015 and 20th
July, 2015 granted anticipatory bail to them. However,
the High Court has taken the view that in view of the
mandate under Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date: 2017.08.02 17:08:35 IST Reason: the Trial Court should not have granted the anticipatory
bail. However, while admitting these cases, the order
1 has been stayed and the appellants have been continuing
under the protection granted by the Trial Court.
3. We are informed that the investigation has been
completed and the charge sheet has been filed. It is now
for the appellants to appear before the Trial Court and
seek regular bail.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submits that they have been at large on bail for the last
two years and they never misused the bail granted to them
and they have fully cooperated with the Investigating
Officer. All these contentions are available to the
appellants to be taken before the Trial Court while it
considers the application for bail.
5. The appeals are disposed of with a direction to the
appellants to surrender before the Trial Court within a
period of one month from today. On the date of
surrender, application for bail shall be considered and
orders be passed on the same day. We make it clear that
we have not considered the matter on merits and it is for
the Trial Court to pass orders on the merits.
.........................J. [KURIAN JOSEPH]
.........................J. [R.BANUMATHI]
New Delhi;
August 1, 2017.
2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free