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

Moulana Syed Anzar Shah Qasmi vs The State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|30 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.916/2019 BETWEEN:
Moulana Syed Anzar Shah Qasmi, Aged about 50 years, No.16, 2nd Cross, Behind Jamiya Masjid, Ilyas Nagar, Kumaraswamy Layout, Bangalore-560 078.
(By Sri. Muzaffar Ahmed, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, By Tilak Nagar Police Station, Rep.by State Public Prosecutor, Annexed to High Court Building Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Sri.Honnappa, HCGP) …Petitioner …Respondent This Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.315/2012 (C.C.No.18003/2018) of Thilaknagar Police Station, Bangalore for the offence punishable under Sections 153A, 153B, 124A, 295A, 506 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner herein has released a Compact Disk containing provocative speech leading to communal disturbance between Islam and other communities in the Country. The said Compact Disks were actually seized in connection with this particular case but because of want of this petitioner, showing him as absconding and he was in custody in a case investigated by National Investigation Agency, he could not be arrested. Therefore, charge-sheet has already been filed for the offences punishable under Sections 153(A), 153(B), 124(A), 295(A) and 506 of IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also produced the order of discharge of the petitioner passed by Delhi Court, Patiyala House in FIR No.67/2015, in connection with the said case, National Investigating Agency registered a case for the offences punishable under Sections 18, 18B and 20 of UA(P) Act but the said offences were not applicable. The only allegation against the petitioner is that, he has given a speech and same is recorded in Compact Disk and distributed among the people, which is against the integrity of the nation and it may provoke communal hatredness among the people. The said offences are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no material to show that the accused has been absconding deliberately and he personally evaded the Court or the investigating agency.
4. Under these facts and circumstances, the above said allegations that, the said Compact Disks containing the speech of the petitioner is to be proved before trial Court beyond all reasonable doubts. The presence of the petitioner before the trial Court is absolutely necessary for conclusion of trial in accordance with law. In the event, petitioner undertakes that he would appear before the Court regularly on all future hearing dates and assist the Court in disposal of the case expeditiously and abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court, there is no legal impediment to grant the anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence the following;
ORDER i) Criminal petition is hereby allowed;
ii) Petitioner shall be released on bail in the event he voluntarily surrender before the Jurisdictional Court within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in connection with CC.No.18003/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 153(A), 153(B), 124(A), 295(A) and 506 of IPC, on the following conditions;
a) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
b) Petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses. If necessary, he should co-operate with Investigating Officer if he called for any further investigation in the case and to file further report to the Court.
c) Petitioner should assist the Investigating Agency for further interrogation as and when called for by the Investigation Officer.
d) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Bangalore City without prior permission of the jurisdictional Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SB
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

Moulana Syed Anzar Shah Qasmi vs The State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
30 July, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra