JOSEPH JOHNSON N. MAITHKURI Vs. SUBRAHMANYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) dtd. 10/6/2021 & 8/11/2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad Bench in Criminal Petition Nos. 101007/2021 & 101621/2021 respectively, by which the High Court has allowed the said criminal petitions preferred by the accused Subrahmanya and Rajesh (respondent No. 1 in the respective appeals) and has directed to release the accused - Subrahmanya and Rajesh on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 157/2019 of Dharwad Rural Police Station for the offences punishable under Ss. 120(B), 302, 201 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 27(3) of the Arms Act, 1959, the original complainant has preferred the present appeals.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant - complainant has vehemently submitted that while directing the accused - respondent No. 1 in the respective appeals to be released on bail, the High Court has not at all considered the gravity of the offences. It is submitted that the High Court has not at all considered the fact that in the present case that there are two eye-witnesses and respondent No. 1 - accused has been identified.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as the State. Though served, none has appeared on behalf of the accused - respondent No. 1 in the respective appeals. We have perused the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court releasing the accused on bail. Even liberty is reserved to the State to move for cancellation of bail in the event of this Court cancelling the bail of accused No. 4 - Umesh Nagappa URF Sangappa.