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

M Samsun Karim Raja @ vs Superintendent Of Police National Investigation

High Court Of Karnataka|27 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.20070/2019 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN :
M. Samsun Karim Raja @ Karim @ Abdul Karim S/o Jainulabddin Aged about 23 years R/o No.44, 1st Street Manmalaimedu, K Puddur Madurai, Tamilnadu-625 009.
Petitioner in Judicial Custody Represented by Mohamed Suhaibu M S/o Mohammed Ali Aged about 37 years R/o No.3/31B, Karisham Pallivasal Nellapettai, Madurai, Tamilnadu-625 009.
(By Sri Mohammed Tahir & Sri Mahaboob Gouse, Advocates) AND :
Superintendent of Police National Investigation Agency MHA Govt. of India Begumpet, Hyderabad … Petitioner Telangana-500 016.
Represented by Special Public Prosecutor Office at High Court Complex Opp: Vidhana Soudha Bengaluru-560 001.
… Respondent (By Sri P. Prasannakumar, Special Public Prosecutor) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to grant an interim bail along with Police escorts to travel to Madurai and attend the funeral and burial rite tomorrow i.e., 27.04.2019 at 05.PM.
This Writ Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R I have heard Sri Mohammed Tahir, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-accused No.2 and Sri P.Prasanna Kumar, learned Special PP, who accepted the notice on behalf of the respondent.
2. This writ petition is filed by accused No.2 praying this Court to grant interim bail along with the police escort to travel to Madurai and attend the funeral and burial rite of his father on 27.4.2019 at about 5.00 p.m., in the interest of justice. In the writ petition it is averred that the petitioner’s father expired on 26.4.2019 at about 7.00 a.m. in Government Hospital at Madurai in Tamil Nadu and he has approached the trial Court immediately after receipt of such information by filing an application for interim bail, but the same came to be rejected by the NIA Special Court by its order dated 26.4.2019 and now he approached this Court praying to grant interim bail to attend the funeral and burial rite of his father.
3. It is the submission of the learned Special PP that the present petition is not maintainable. In view of Section 21(4) of the National Investigating Agency Act (‘NIA Act’ for short), the appeal shall lie to the High Court against the order of the Special Court granting or rejecting the bail and the same should be heard and decided by the Division Bench which is having criminal roaster as per Section 21(2) of the NIA Act. He has also relied upon the decision in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh through Inspector General, National Investigation Agency Vs. Mohd. Hussain @ Saleem & others, reported in (2014)1 SCC 258. Therefore, he prays to dismiss the petition as not maintainable.
4. During the course of arguments, this Court directed the learned Special PP to ascertain the factual situation which is submitted by the petitioner’s counsel. Accordingly, the learned Special PP got the instructions from CBCID of Madurai and submitted that already funeral rite of the father of the petitioner has been concluded by observing all the rituals and there is nothing to be attended by the petitioner-accused No.2. Even the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.2 after ascertaining the same, also submitted the said fact before this Court admitting that already funeral rite has been concluded and body has been buried.
5. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present writ petition becomes infructuous in view of the only specific prayer which has been made in this writ petition. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at least the petitioner may be permitted to go and see his mother, who is wife of the deceased. Since this Court has come to the conclusion that the present writ petition has become infructuous, the said prayer now cannot be entertained. However, if the petitioner-accused No.2 is advised so, he can approach the Court below with appropriate application and the same may be considered by the Court below if law permits.
With the aforesaid observations this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE *ck/-
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

M Samsun Karim Raja @ vs Superintendent Of Police National Investigation

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
27 April, 2019
Judges
  • B A Patil