{"id":128274,"date":"2011-05-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-05-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011"},"modified":"2018-06-05T22:02:10","modified_gmt":"2018-06-05T16:32:10","slug":"riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011","title":{"rendered":"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana<\/div>\n
1\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT 0}?' KARNATAKA AT eg;:<I(;;z:L;-C\u00a7\u00a7{i::_. '  %\n\nDATED THIS THE: 315'? DAY OF .1' 13) 4\n\nBEFORE; ' ' ' _ V\nTHE HONBLE MRJUSTICE \nCRIMINAL PE:r1T1:3N.._No. 2:38': QF  ' %\nemweew;  V' " V' ' 1\n S\/0 Hakim Sabl \nAged about 22 years,.  ' T   _\nResiding at No.91? 4mWCI"QSS,. 1 \n\nRamrahimnag_ar,__  _  - \nMandya Dis\u00a7i'ricf;;,.e-'    " _   Petitioner\n\n[By Sri . B   ..i*0f"vSIVi  M . Parthasarathy\nand Sr)' .Ad\\"re-.e;aH1E_e\u00e9}\n\nAND \n\nState of Ke:.fnata1;aA,"\u00ab._b' \nRe1_:\u00a7resented"by V\n\n M\u00e9;&:dmfPo11ce,""'- -------- \n, Malxdya District.  Respondent\n\nA   Sr:4.:(EE,:\\zi.:.S\u00a7iniVasa Reddyg HCGP}\n\n'1"hiSA\u00ab:'*'Cirimina} Petition is f\ufb01ed under Section 439\nCR.9.C';_ praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in\n\n---  ..Cer:me'~N0.4\u00ab73\/2010 of Maddur Poiiee Station" Mandya\n forfhe offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201\n _<::f EPC,\n\n'i'h:\u00a3s Criminai Fefitiem eemirsg fer erciers en Ehie\n\nV H "\u20ac\u00a78.}?\u00a7 the {?{)i3};"\u00a7 riza\u00e9e the feliezvirzg\/__;\n\n=5'\n1\n5\nem\n\ngig\/\/\/,ee\n\n\n\n9\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
In this petition filed under <\/p>\n
the petitioner who has been arteeigneti
\nin C.C.No.IO2’7\/10 on the file \u00e9ofhthe  :s’1\u00a7;gg\u00a7iuht;g
\nregistered for the offences”on’r3isheb’1e_
\n143, 12o(B), 302, 379.gnde2o L {PC has<\/p>\n
sought for an order <\/p>\n
2. T the  brief is as under:\n<\/p>\n
One   ffsiliiyaiah resident of
\n   and one Girish were
\nhabitn’aIVV’ \ufb01vere involved in several theft<\/p>\n
cases anct:f*they,i;1se’d to’ commit theft of valuables like<\/p>\n
   go1<:i'Va'n*(i'Vthey used to dispose of the stolen<\/p>\n
  =v\u00e9i1uab\u00a7e"o'ftt.ieies through accused No.1 and others. The<\/p>\n
said \\7enk:;tesha was not visiting his house regularly<\/p>\n
 and 'i;Vs\u20ac:d to remain outside for months together and<\/p>\n
 sonie times he used to return home after several<\/p>\n
Aioienths. As the said Venkateshe. did not return home<\/p>\n
Vt Vofor near}}; 1%; yeafs prize to }5.8,2GIQ9 the said<\/p>\n
Bili\u00e9yeiah iodge\u00e9; :5: :'e;:\u00ab::\u00a7"te <aJith the EEG, Eviaddar ?eEiee<\/p>\n
'x
\n5 's x, \/u
\n a\/\/\/,<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
Station reporting missing of his son \\?enl;a’tesh_\u00a3L:M_<\/p>\n
the basis of said report, the police registered  ii;-, <\/p>\n
Crime No.473\/10 for rnissing\ufb02of  <\/p>\n
investigation. During investigation, it xvasi-‘eVealed’3 th;\u00ab1t’g<\/p>\n
the said Venkatesha and  used to<\/p>\n
dispose of the stoleVr1..prope’1’tics;tlirougnl\u00e9icciilsed No.1
\nand others. On  petitioner and
\nothers, it xxfas-Lrevealetlgxlvlfenkatesha and
\nGirish Wa:_nted__   of  Vqnlslntity of gold which
\nthey   sought the assistance
\nof acenseclll accused No.1 along with
\nother eiocoseci “Vn2iltcl3:.et1:\u00e9lJ\ufb01conspiracy to eliminate said<\/p>\n
Vengkatesho  Girlsh and then to take away the gold<\/p>\n
 x\u00a5zllitol1’\\\\e'{h?;};intended to dispose of and in pursuance of<\/p>\n
  ‘ec\u00a5nspiVf”rVaoy, when said Venkatesha and Girish<\/p>\n
elp~prog:e’1e\u00e9:ilaceused No.1 with the gold intended to be<\/p>\n
 ncltsposecl of, accused No.1 with the help of other<\/p>\n
l’  ae.c_t:secl tool: those two persons in 3 Marathi Van, killed<\/p>\n
  \ufb02ooth ‘Jenkstcsha and Glrish by strangulating them?<\/p>\n
t,hre:ai the dead bodies into the $\u00a7:nsh22 rivet’, took ezway<\/p>\n
ihe geld which was in the poeseeeien  <\/p>\n
Venkateeha and distributed the   <\/p>\n
*:heI:1se1Ves. During invesiigaiie;1″e\u00a7 -the -eaeeg? if _wa::~f{‘aEee<\/p>\n
reveaied ihai: this pe\ufb01tiener  \u00ab.\n<\/p>\n
eonfeseien before his UneIe–.__E:’e:1feesiI1g’ the e’e1\u00a7%i:::issier:”<\/p>\n
ef the offence. After eemgaletiiig t\u00a7f1e”vi.11Ve’\u00a7etigatior1,<\/p>\n
charge sheet eame tcftzeelaidf  j.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
4. I have A  Rae, Iearned
\n001111861  learned Counsel for
\nthe    Reddye learned
\nHigh   Fieacier appearing for the
\nrespendefit~V_’Stai-_e;A’-.15e:’;esed the records made available.<\/p>\n
_5.v.$:i;E3.C.Seetharama Rae contended as under:<\/p>\n
V’     stage, there is absolutely me evidence<\/p>\n
te”~\u00ab.}:>ri:\u00a7’:a  estabiieh the eempiieity ef the petitiener<\/p>\n
 Ahe2*eirzati1 the a\ufb02eged murder of 2 perseee, therefore the<\/p>\n
 -,,Vpe\ufb01\u00a7\u00a7ieI:er \ufb01e eeiiiied te be en\u00e9argeci en eai}; that even<\/p>\n
   _\u00a7’1\u00b0eI31 \ufb01le eemeate ef the reper: Zedge\ufb01 by the fame: ef<\/p>\n
‘\u00e9enkaeeelaae sai\u00e9 Eferzkaieeha uee\u00e9 iie reezaie euieide fer<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
months together and in the absence of  <\/p>\n
corpus delicti it cannot be presumed _\u20ac:h;frt:–v..Vt}:Aose t3Wo__V <\/p>\n
persons have been dene to de;:th,_H\u00e91sg\u00a7;\u00abueh;\u00bb._e;i:>;;o1\ufb01te1\u00a7*’<\/p>\n
there are no materials to _attra1ctWf,he ooffcrrce L-\u00a7r1″<ier*a<\/p>\n
Section 302 IPC; that ever:  case'-of  oroeechutiorr<\/p>\n
is accepted at its faee. value';  eteSi'g11*e:d to this
\npetitioner is that 'A  by deceased
\nVenkatesh the'~?,S_t,ote1T;\u00abhi\ufb01roperties and in
\nturn    Veceused No.2 who in
\nturn #a_.rre;rig\u00a7e'c3f:<.f:or_  stolen property as
\nsuch;th._ereVhie.–a,h'eoiu.te}y no evidence to indicate that
\naccuseo7._  in the alleged murder of<\/p>\n
Venkateshe   that even as per the allegations<\/p>\n
 the proeecution in the charge sheet, it was<\/p>\n
 aC:c1i:;e'd._V 'Noe,.,';i to 6 who strangulated the deceased<\/p>\n
pe-r_sor_1e~ Keith towels and since, accused Nose to 6 have<\/p>\n
 AAa1rea:<\u00a3y\u00ab:'been enlarged on haii, the petitioner herein is<\/p>\n
 'e;1t\u00a7?:ied to be enlarged or: bail on the prirxcipie of parity.<\/p>\n
5. Gr: the other harrsi. Sri\ufb01rirrivase Reedy<\/p>\n
eerrterzctect as err\ufb01er:\n<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
That the evidence on record f}2,e’ie<\/p>\n
establishes that the two deceased pereehe.  <\/p>\n
seen in the Company of thie pet1ti:>.rie:~–.a1igi, “otVhe’r<\/p>\n
accused and the extra judicial e0i1t’e_ssion’i:1Aaa:ie~ b3;i;his.,’<\/p>\n
petitioner before his Une1e”‘–1:ifima  the<\/p>\n
complicity of this V spetitiorieri.n_:iri\u00b0’\u00bbithe eijvmrriission of
\nmurder 01’ two deee\u00e9a\u00e9ecii “f’\u00bb.: that though the
\nCOFPUS d\u20ac1iCfCi.1D1aiS  evidence on
\nrecord prima he is  _eetab1ish eommiesiori
\nof rn1ir<;1_er"'~:;i;"*tx1'is;{,g'  petitioner along with
\nOiZh\u20ac15vVaC\u00a7?i1e\u20aci\u20aciVVpei*SQ1i\u00e9}'.._J\u00a7l"i\u20aci'\u20acfQI'\u20ac: having regard to the<\/p>\n
materiaie iavaiiiahie' reeord, at this stage, there are<\/p>\n
reaeor:ah1e.V gifeuhda te believe that the petitioner is<\/p>\n
   Otiehees aiieged and since the offences<\/p>\n
   the petitioner is punishable with death<\/p>\n
01'"=lif\u20ac_\u00a7f}Ci.p\u00a7'iSOf1II1f3f1f he is not entitled for grant at hail:<\/p>\n
 xthatzhaving regard to the ease of the preeeeutieh that<\/p>\n
 -.,Vthen5petitieher and ether aeeused have aiready de$t.re}Ied<\/p>\n
h  ..  impertant part ef the evicieriee by t.hrewirig the \ufb01eaei<\/p>\n
heaies te the river whi::h has ieci the Ci\u20aci\u00a7’\u00a7’,}”ii{?i’,i{}iE iii’ the<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
evidence, if this petitioner is enlarged en ~\u00abtiie1fe:.._ieg_<\/p>\n
every poesibility of this petitioner i\u20ac:1I”Ilpt’3l71}1″1\u00bb\u00a7;,.:3FOS\u20acCli{iQll”.. ”<\/p>\n
evieienee and there is also likeliheedjjef <\/p>\n
\ufb02eeing away from justice as thereis grim pi-espeet ef”i’iis’=<\/p>\n
cenvietion, therefore the petitiener lei ~ne’te -entitlecl to be<\/p>\n
enlarged on bail.\n<\/p>\n
7. I have’–bestQWedfimy*ieerieue’lleensideratioris to
\nthe submiseioiiell iifnacie by thejj-ietartielcl counsel on both<\/p>\n
sides.\n<\/p>\n
V8, “Not  stage, the case of the<\/p>\n
proseeutiori -rests A1ajlr1*…eireumstantial evidence. Of
\nec:.’u\u00a7rfse__L’evjen aiiiieerding to the ease of the prosecution,<\/p>\n
‘  ‘de1ieti___of the two alleged deceased persons have<\/p>\n
H reeenzered, It is the specific ease ef the<\/p>\n
presieeiitiheti that the two pereons were done to death<\/p>\n
  n\u20ac\u00a7e;}Q:l1’tVVNl 5% years prior to the report lodged by the father<\/p>\n
 Vlenkateehe arid the dead bodies were thmwzi iiiite<\/p>\n
_..Simsha river wliere heavy water eiirrente were passing<\/p>\n
33 2:. result ef which the twe deeti eediee have beet:<\/p>\n
8<\/span>
\nwashed away and they have not been traced, Ae.e’e;ding<\/p>\n
to the ease of the prosecution, the three eiIj_eni13.vstei’neeVs<\/p>\n
which have been pitted against this petitioners   it <\/p>\n
(1) the two deceased personsv.;it}er’e <\/p>\n
company of this petitioner and other acettseti “pe’;’s”ons’a<\/p>\n
(2) the extra judicial confession\u00bb rnadehf’thisizgetitioner
\nbefore his Uncle   (Ehviiireeovery of
\ncertain silver and vii\ufb01\u00e9liitsuant to the
\nvoluntary   been made by
\naccused   of Alia Baksh
\nat   that this petitioner
\nhad  en’  confession before him and<\/p>\n
thereby he’e_orife.sse’d of having eernmitted the murders<\/p>\n
–  ofvt..t{e:;”tv;oe’2tsons V\u00e9itith the assistance of other accused<\/p>\n
 :je:5Vsene.,:AhaIiC\u00a7-thereafter taking away the gold from the<\/p>\n
 the deceased and disposing of dead bodies<\/p>\n
 enct epgiropriating’ the proceeds among themselves. The<\/p>\n
ezmiienee on record also prime faete indieaties that the<\/p>\n
 so ,,’.tva;e deeeeseo persons were East seen in the eoinpany ef<\/p>\n
the aeeesed persons just, prior to the \u00a7L\u00a7i’\u00a7G\u00a7”?\u00e9fd date <3?<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
commission sf the 0fl’en<:e. Having regard to t,}ie*eia:.se.._'oi"<\/p>\n
the prosecution at this stage, there \\x!a.s'alre3;el\u00a7:l <\/p>\n
attempt tn destroy the \u20acVid\u20ac1'lC\u20ac.rE'i\u20ac;IT1\u20ac'l};'-'Z. thfneeing  the<\/p>\n
dead bodies into the river. Therel'ei'e';'l  <\/p>\n
apprehension of the proseeutien regatdingl vt:ann;p'e1*ing the"<\/p>\n
prosecution evidence, .Cannot–uibLe_ l"h.y.:.1Sh\u00a7ed aside.
\nAccerding to the ease ii:1i'–,,f:ihe person before
\nwhom this petiti__one:f;"VV's9.iel:   extra. judicial
\neenfessionhs\u00bb   the possibility of
\nthis pefiliqfiei'  evidence cannot
\nbe nilecl'   tegard to the facts and
\ncircumstances  at this stage, I am of the<\/p>\n
CO}'1_i:S3\u00bbltIl\u20acfF\u20acCl oj3'i'n_iQn that this is not a fit ease for exercising<\/p>\n
.' "the diseAref;iA\u20ac)'h by granting bail to this petitioner.<\/p>\n
 .lnj–n.the circumstance of the ease, the petitioner is<\/p>\n
 net e*:iti'tlee:i to be enlarged on bail: Hence the petition is<\/p>\n
" it  yjejet\u00e9teel.\n<\/p>\n
5%\/E3
\nZEEGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011 Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana 1 IN THE HIGH COURT 0}?’ KARNATAKA AT eg;:<I(;;z:L;-C\u00a7\u00a7{i::_. ' % DATED THIS THE: 315'? DAY OF .1' 13) 4 BEFORE; ' ' ' _ V THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE CRIMINAL PE:r1T1:3N.._No. 2:38': QF ' % emweew; V' " V' ' 1 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-128274","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRiaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-05T16:32:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-05T16:32:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1430,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011\",\"name\":\"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-05T16:32:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-05T16:32:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011","datePublished":"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-05T16:32:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011"},"wordCount":1430,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011","name":"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-05T16:32:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/riaz-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-31-may-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Riaz vs State Of Karnataka on 31 May, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128274","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=128274"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128274\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128274"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128274"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128274"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}