Karnataka History Sheeter granted bail on the ground of location of Tower and use of SIM card : SC orders Immediate Surrender

Supreme Court Quashes Bail for Murder Convict, Orders Immediate Surrender. High Court's Decision Overturned Due to Criminal Antecedents and Evidence of Conspiracy Control from Jail

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has set aside the Karnataka High Court's order granting bail to Chetan @ Chethu @ Yechenahalli Chethu, a convict in a murder and conspiracy case. The apex court, comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and S.V.N. Bhatti, emphasized the respondent's criminal history and evidence suggesting his control over the crime from jail as key reasons for quashing the bail.

The case stems from the respondent's conviction under Sections 302 read with 120(B), 109, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), following a full-fledged trial in which he was sentenced to life imprisonment. Despite serving only eight months of incarceration, the Karnataka High Court had granted bail based on the respondent's tower location and alleged use of a SIM card. However, the Supreme Court found these grounds insufficient, noting the proximity of the tower location to the jail and the respondent's management of the conspiracy from behind bars.

The State of Karnataka, represented by the Additional Advocate General, argued that the respondent, a history-sheeter under the Karnataka Prevention Of Dangerous Activities Act, orchestrated the crime through accomplices while imprisoned. Evidence presented included call detail records linking the respondent to the crime, despite the prison's jammer being non-functional due to maintenance work.

In its decision, the Supreme Court underscored the respondent's eight other criminal antecedents and his ongoing incarceration for an offense under Section 307 of the IPC at the time of the crime. The court held that the High Court's rationale regarding the SIM card and tower location was factually incorrect, leading to its decision to quash the bail and cancel the bail bonds.

The respondent's defense claimed false implication due to past record and argued the SIM card was not registered in his name but in the name of a prosecution witness. Despite these claims, the Supreme Court maintained that the suspension of sentence and grant of bail was unwarranted given the seriousness of the conviction.

The court directed the respondent to surrender within one week, failing which the police are instructed to ensure his arrest and judicial custody. The Supreme Court clarified that its observations are specific to the bail issue and should not influence the pending appeal in the High Court. The respondent retains the liberty to request an expedited hearing of his appeal.

This judgment highlights the judiciary's stance on denying bail to convicts with substantial criminal backgrounds and evidence of crime management from imprisonment, reinforcing the integrity of judicial decisions based on comprehensive trial outcomes.

Statutory provision(s): Sections 302, 120(B), 109, 201, 307 of the Indian Penal Code

State Of Karnataka v. Chetan @ Chethu @ Yechenahalli Chethu, (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2788424