KASHIBAI Vs. PARASURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought rejection of bail in connection with S.C.No.167/2012 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Bijapur on the ground that the accused have violated the conditions imposed by the Court after granting the bail.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel representing the accused and the learned Addl. SPP.

(3.) It is alleged that in connection with grant of bail for the accused the petitioner being the wife of the deceased, filed an application for cancellation of bail granted to the accused. However, the same has been disputed by stating that in order to get property and estate petitioner being the wife of the deceased has come before the Court and the petitioner cannot maintain such an application. If the prosecution has suo motu found fit, it can seek for cancellation of bail as per Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. Suo motu power is not conferred on the complainant or the aggrieved. Moreover, petitioner is not concerned with the deceased and the matter is still under investigation. Accordingly, he has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Shankar V/s State of Karnataka and Others, 2013 2 KCCR 994 to contend that no petition can be maintained in this regard. At the most petitioner would assist the prosecution in the event the State takes a decision to file an application for cancellation of bail and suo motu petitioner cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court and the same cannot be entertained. Further, he has also relied upon another judgment of this Court SMT SULIYA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MANGALORE SOUTH POLICE, 2008 3 KCCR 1817 ) on this aspect.