High CourtsSingle Bench(2016) 01 KAR CK 0273

Mahammed Ali vs State of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 21 January 2016 · Citation: (2016) 2 KantLJ 505

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.V. Chandrashekhara, J.
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 314 of 2016

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 499 words

A.V. Chandrashekhara, J. - Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

2.

Petitioner who is accused 1 in Crime No. 56 of 2015 on the file of Sagar Town Police Station, Shimoga District has approached this Court seeking regular bail under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Case is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143,147,148,115,120-B and 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. He is in judicial custody since 23-2-2015.

3.

Case on hand relates to the murder of a person by name Hussainer alias Babu on 20th March, 2015 at about 8.30 p.m. in front of Sharavathi Cool Drinks Shop at Sagar Town. It is alleged that this petitioner and accused 8 instigated other accused to assault the deceased with deadly weapons and cause his murder.

4.

Learned Government Pleader has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that it is premature to disbelieve the case of the persecution and the material collected by the police in regard to the involvement of this petitioner along with other accused by forming an unlawful assembly and by holding deadly weapons, make out a prima facie case.

5.

Main allegation is against the remaining accused. Overt act attributed to this petitioner and accused 8 is that they instigated other accused. Whether such instigation was made by this petitioner by forming an unlawful assembly will have be established at the time of trial. Entire investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed.

6.

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners do not have any criminal background. His submission is taken on record. The petitioners are the permanent residents of Sagar Town. Taking all these facts into consideration, the apprehension of the learned Government Pleader would be suitably met by imposing proper conditions. Hence I pass the following:

The petition is allowed.

Petitioner shall be enlarged on bail, in Cri. No. 56 of 2015 of Sagar Town Police Station, subject to the following conditions:

1.

Petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with a surety, for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

2.

Petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper any of the prosecution witness.

3.

Petitioner shall not hold out threats to the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

4.

Petitioner shall not involve himself in any criminal activities.

5.

He shall co-operate with the I.O. in further investigation.

6.

He shall attend the respondent-police station once in a week, before final report is submitted, on every Sunday between 9.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., without fail and thereafter once in a month on every second Sunday between 9.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till the disposal of the case.

7.

It is made clear that if the petitioner does not comply with any one of the conditions imposed on him, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail.Rs.