Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 39912 (KAR)

SRI SANTHOSH SHETTY v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/10381/2023 · 2026-09-11

S Vishwajith Shetty

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010546172023 NC: 2026:KHC:49852 CRL.P No. 10381 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10381 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI SANTHOSH SHETTY S/O RAGHU RAM SHETTY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT 2/84, PADDAYI BETTU SARAPADI, VILLAGE AND POST D.K. - 574 211. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SUYOG HERELE E, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANTWAL RURAL POLICE STATION REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE - 01. 2. THE TAHASILDAR AND MEMBER SECRETARY TALUK SAND MONITORING COMMITTEE BANTWAL TALUK, D.K.- 574 211. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRL.P AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,MANGALURU DATED 26.08.2023 IN SPL.C.NO.135/2019 (PRODUCED AT DOCUMENT NO.1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010546172023 NC: 2026:KHC:49852 CRL.P No. 10381 of 2023 ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioner is before this Court in this petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.PC with a prayer to quash the order dated 26.08.2023 passed by the Court of Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Mangaluru, in Spl.C.No.135/2019. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Sessions Judge vide the order impugned, has cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner without even granting an opportunity of hearing, after rejecting his application filed seeking exemption of appearance. He submits that in all the earlier dates of hearing, he was diligently appearing before the Trial Court. 4. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that the Trial Court has cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner for the reason that he was regularly absent before the Trial Court. Therefore, there is no error in the said order. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010546172023 NC: 2026:KHC:49852 CRL.P No. 10381 of 2023 5. Perusal of the order impugned would go to show that the learned Advocate who had appeared on behalf of the petitioner had filed an application before the Trial Court seeking petitioner's exemption from appearance on 26.08.2023. The Trial Court has rejected the said application and proceeded to cancel the bail granted to him and directed to register a separate miscellaneous case against him and his surety. 6. A reading of the order impugned would go to show that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner before canceling the bail that was granted to him in the present case by the Trial Court. Therefore, on this short ground, the order impugned needs to be set aside. Accordingly, the following order: 7. Petition is allowed. The order dated 26.08.2023 passed by the Court of Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Mangaluru, in Spl.C.No.135/2019, is set aside. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK