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

Mujeeb @ Kallatra Najeeb vs The State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|21 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K N PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7720 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
MUJEEB @ KALLATRA NAJEEB K.A. @ MOHAMMED NAJEEB K. S/O.KALLATRA ABBAS HAJI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT A1, NIHMATH MANZIL MONUMOOLA, KALNAD POST KASARAGOD DISTRICT KERALA-671 317. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.VISHNUMURTHY, ADV.) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ULLAL POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE-560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.ROHITH B.J., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C., PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.63/2017 OF ULLAL P.S. MANGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120B, 143, 144, 147, 148, 279, 341, 504, 506, 302, 307, 326 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3, 25 (1) (IB), 7, 25 (1) (1A), 27 (3) OF INDIAN ARMS ACT AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard and perused the records.
2. Petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.6 in Crime No.63/2017. Later the original charge sheet has been filed in C.C.No.1881/2017. As this petitioner was not available, a split up charge sheet has been filed in C.C.No.2294/2017 for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 279, 341, 504, 506, 302, 307, 326 and 149 of IPC, 1860 and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of Indian Arms Act, 1959.
3. The brief allegations are that petitioner and the deceased by name Khalia Rafiq and another by name Feroz were traveling in a car to go to Mangaluru. When the car reached near Kotekar Petrol pump, Kotekar Village, Mangaluru, then a tipper lorry bearing Regn.No.KA-14-M- 7005 came in rash and negligent manner and dashed the car in which the deceased petitioner and another were traveling. Thereafter, it is stated in FIR that one white colour Ritz car came from the back side of the car in which the deceased was traveling and stopped there. Two persons got down from the tipper lorry and 5 persons got down from Ritz car and after seeing them, the deceased Khaliya Rafiq got down from the car and ran towards the petrol bunk. Thereafter, this petitioner and another person by name Feroz also got down from the said car and ran away. Thereafter, the complainant was witnessing with all the other persons who came in the Ritz car as well as the in the said lorry, they chased the deceased Rafiq and assaulted with choppers as well as accused no.1 has shot with a pistol against the deceased who sustained injuries and later succumbed to the injuries.
4. On the above said allegations, police have registered the case and investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet. During the course of investigation, they also recorded the statement of Feroze who little bit changed his version and stated that the car which was driven by this petitioner in which the said Feroze and deceased were traveling, he himself has dashed against the Tipper lorry slowly and made the car to stand by and thereafter, a white Ertiga car came from back side and 5 persons got down from the said vehicle and after seeing the said Rafiq started to run away. In that context, other accused persons have chased him and assaulted him. There is no overt act alleged against this petitioner but it is stated that this petitioner went to the car of the accused persons and he sat in the said car, at that particular point of time but the same is absent in the FIR is concerned moreover, no overt act has been alleged against this person as he actually participated in assaulting the deceased. Similarly placed accused No.5 has already been released on bail by this Court in Crl.P.6557/2017 under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
5. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances, the conspiracy, if any between this petitioner and other accused persons who actually assaulted the deceased has to be established during the course of full dressed trial. In the above said facts and circumstances, in my opinion, petitioner has made out a ground for grant of bail even on the ground of parity. Hence, the following:
O R D E R The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with (Crime No.0063/2017 of Ullal Police Station) pending before JMFC III Court, Mangaluru registered for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 279, 341, 504, 506, 302, 307, 326 read with 149 of IPC, 1860 and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of Indian Arms Act, 1959 subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional court on all the 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 Brn
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

Mujeeb @ Kallatra Najeeb vs The State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
21 November, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra