IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K N PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7700/2019 BETWEEN:
SAMEERULLA ISLAM S/O MD NURUL ISLAM AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS R/AT LABOUR TENT NEAR HAL QUARTERS JYOTHI NAGAR BANGALORE – 560 042 PERMANENT R/AT GOAGAON DAKSHIN CHHIPI GOAGAON POST, UTTAR DINAJPUR DIST.
WEST BENGAL – 733 210. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. MOHAMMED PASHA C, ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HAL POLICE STATION BENGALURU, REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT CAMPUS BANGALORE – 560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.168/2019 REGISTERED BY H.A.L POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UDNER SECTIONS 302 AND 307 READ WITH 34 OF IPC.
THIS 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 respondent. Perused the records.
2. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.4 in Crime No.168/2019 of H.A.L Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 326, 302 IPC. Initially a case was registered under Section 326 IPC and at the time of filing of the charge sheet after investigation Sections 302 and 307 read with 34 IPC were added in C.C.No.54961/2019 which later culminated in S.C.No.1339/2019 on the file of the XXVI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 26.04.2019 at about 6 am all the accused persons had been to the shed belonging to the complainant Mr.Raji Hussen Raj situated at Jyoti Nagara, Bengaluru. At that time, the deceased Giyasuddin and Mahadesh Gadi were present there. All the accused persons and those two persons quarreled with each other and it is alleged that suddenly accused Nos.1 to 4 have taken the iron rod and clubs which were there on the spot and assaulted the deceased Giyasuddin and Mahadesh Gadi. In that context Mr.Giyasuddin sustained severe injuries and died later. There is no dispute with regard to the death of the deceased but what the learned counsel for the petitioner submits is that it was a case and counter case i.e., group clash has taken place between the two groups. Petitioner also sustained injuries in the said group clash. The deceased Giyasuddin and other persons have also suffered injuries, they were admitted to the hospital and a counter case has been lodged in Crime No.167/2019 for similar offence under Section 326 IPC in which one Mr.Barjahan Ali and Saiman are shown as injured persons in the said case and Mr.Giyasuddin and Mahadesh Gadi who are the injured persons in Crime No.168/2019 were shown as accused Nos.1 and 2. The medical certificate in both the cases show that both of them have suffered grevious injuries and admitted to the hospital. Amongst them Giyasuddin died and therefore, subsequently offence under Sections 302 and 307 have been incorporated in connection with Crime No.168/2019. It appears the charge sheet has also been filed in connection with Crime No.167/2019.
4. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances, as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a group clash had taken place between two parties and who is aggressor amongst them has to be thrashed out during the course of full dressed trial or even, whether in a spur of moment the incident has taken place because in the complaint it is stated that all the accused were not armed with any weapons and suddenly the quarrel started and the accused took the iron rods and wooden pieces on the spot itself and quarreled with each other. Therefore, under the above said circumstances when there is no previous bad antecedent alleged against the petitioners during the course of evidence, the Court has to examine whether the case falls under Sections 302 or 304 Part I and II of IPC or even whether the right of defense was there to the accused has also to be considered by the Court during the course of trial. Therefore, considering the nature of allegations particularly, the facts of the case, in my opinion, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 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.168/2019 of HAL Police Station) or C.C. No. 54961/2019 on the file of XXVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bengaluru registered for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 302 read with 34 IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with Two solvent sureties 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