IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3266 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
1. AMEER SUHAIL @ AMMI @ PUKAAR AMMI, S/O. ABDUL HAKEEM, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT:APNA PLAZA, 3RD FLOOR, BORUGUDDE, KANNUR KUNDALA, KANNUR VILLAGE & POST, MANGALURU TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT-574 222.
2. MOHAMMED HUSSAIN @ SADDAM HUSSAIN @ MUNNA, S/O. ABDUL LATHEEF, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT: BELOW KANKANADY MASJID, KANKANADY, MANGALURU TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT-575 103.
3. ATTHU @ ARSHAD, S/O. ISUBU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT:NEAR JELLYGUDDE POST OFFICE, BAJAL VILLAGE, MANGALURU TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT-574 222. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B. LETHIF, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY BANTWAL RURAL POLICE STATION, D.K. DISTRICT, REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NASRULLA KHAN, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BIAL IN CR.NO.296/2017 OF BUNTWALA RURAL P.S., D.K., DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 341, 427, 324, 326, 307, 302, 120B R/W 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioners are accused Nos.6, 7 and 12 respectively in Crime No.296 of 2017, registered at Bantwala Rural Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against thirteen accused for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 427, 324, 326, 307, 302, 120B read with Section 149 of IPC.
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant was working as a loader in a Cargo at Goa. On 25.09.2017 at about 10:00 a.m., one Appi of Maripalla called the complainant over phone and informed that Panthonji side persons attacked him and the same was informed to one Zia. It is further alleged that immediately in the rented Swift car of Fayaz, he along with Mustaq, Anees, Chammu, Ajmal and Zia went towards Maripalla and at about 10:45 p.m., they reached near Parangipete Police Station and at that time, one Innova Car came and stopped in front of the Swift car in which, the complainant was proceeding and found one Noufal Faizalnagar, Achi @ Moopa, Achi Faizal Nagara, Noufal Kannur, Ammi Kannur, Munna Faizalnagara, Arshad Faizalnagara and Saddam and they were having deadly weapons and attacked the car driver-Faizal and inmate Zia on their heads and other parts of their body. At that time, the complainant, Mustaq, Anees, Chammu, Ajmal tried to escape from the said place and the accused assaulted them with an intention to murder and caused grievous injuries. It is further alleged that one Chammu who was with the complainant was not seen by the complainant and since Ajmal had put bandage to his leg, he was not assaulted. There was an injury to his hand from the broken car glasses. At that point of time, public gathered and the accused persons escaped from the spot.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the main allegation of assaulting the deceased is by accused Nos.10 and 11 and because of the said injuries caused by accused Nos.10 and 11, the deceased succumbed to the injuries. He further submits that Accused Nos.4 and 8 as well as accused Nos.3 and 9 have already been enlarged on bail. He has made available the copy of the bail order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.8989/2018 c/w. Crl.P.No.1178/2019 in which the bail order was passed in respect of accused Nos.3 and 9. Accordingly, he seeks to release the accused-petitioners on bail on the ground of parity and also on the ground that they are innocent and not committed any offence.
6. The learned HCGP on the other hand vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners contending that the accused have committed double murder and if the accused/petitioners are enlarged on bail then they may tamper with the prosecution witnesses and they will flee from justice.
7. The order passed by this Court in the Criminal Petition No.8989 of 2018 c/w. Crl. P. No.1178 of 2019 goes to show that accused Nos.3 and 9 were released on bail on the ground of parity. Further, it is also not in dispute that accused Nos.4 and 8 are also released on bail. This court in the aforesaid criminal petition has observed that the records indicates that it is accused Nos.10 and 11 who have assaulted the deceased with deadly weapons causing grievous injuries. It is also noticed that charge sheet has already been filed and accused are not required for any further interrogation. It is brought to the notice of this Court that accused Nos.6 and 12 were arrested on 13.10.2017 and Accused No.7 was arrested on 17.11.2017 and since then, they are in judicial custody. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also considering that other similarly placed accused have already been enlarged on bail, the petitioners are entitled for bail.
8. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioners (accused Nos.6, 7 and 12) are ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.296/2017 registered in Bantwala Rural Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 427, 324, 326, 307, 302, 120B read with Section 149 of IPC pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC Court, Bantwal, D.K. subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court.
(ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and shall not hamper the case in any manner.
(iii) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission.
(iv) The petitioners shall be regular in attending the Court proceedings;
(v) If any of the above conditions are violated then the prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of this bail order.
Sd/- JUDGE snc