Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

K Mohammed Azeem Usman vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|21 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5421 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
K.MOHAMMED AZEEM USMAN S/O.YUSUF SAAB.K AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT.MANJUNATHA BADAVANE HULIYUR ROAD, NEAR SAIBABA TEMPLE HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA – 577 527.
(BY SRI.HASHMATH PASHA, SR., ADV., FOR M/S.HASHMATH PASHA ASSTS.,) AND:
... PETITIONER STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HEBBAGODI POLICE STATON BANGALORE – 560 099.
(BY SRI.K.P.YOGANNA, HCGP) …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITOINER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.259/2019 OF HEBBAGODI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 376, 313, 420, 504 AND 506 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. The respondent – Police have registered a case in Crime No.259/2019 against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 376, 313, 420, 504 and 506 of IPC.
3. The brief allegations are that the complainant was aged 38 years. It is alleged that the petitioner had assured the complainant that he would get her job in Bangalore. Accordingly, at his instruction, she came to Bangalore and infact the petitioner took her to his house in J.P.R. Layout and further it is stated that he committed forcible sexual intercourse on her. Thereafter, they joined together and he kept her in the house situated at Vinayaka Layout, Singena Agrahara Road, Anekal Taluk for a period of 9 months. They virtually resided as husband and wife having physical contact with each other. She also became pregnant twice and infact he made her to get aborted twice. It is further submitted that she demanded for marriage, when he refused, it appears that a complaint came to be lodged.
4. On the basis of the above said facts, it is difficult at this stage to make out a case whether it falls under Section 376 or 420 of IPC or whether it is a consensual sex between the petitioner as well as the victim. Considering the age of the victim and also the conduct of the victim as well as the petitioner, in my opinion, petitioner is required to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the following:-
O R D E R The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with CrimeNo.259/2019 of Hebbagodi Police Station registered against him for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 313, 420, 504 and 506 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE VMB
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

K Mohammed Azeem Usman vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
21 August, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra