Karnataka High Court
Mr Thajuddin vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 April, 2024
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:16789
WP No. 11894 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 11894 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
MR. THAJUDDIN
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
S/O ABDUL RAZAAK
KANJIRAPRAMBIL HOUSE
VEDIMARA MANNAM
P.O. NORTH, PARAVOOR
ERANAKULAM, KERALA - 683 513
CURRENTY AT BANGALORE CENTRAL
PRISON, PARAPPANAAGRAHARA
BANGALORE - 560 100
(REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE MRS FOUZIA )
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADV.)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CCB POLICE BENGALURU
Digitally
signed by REP BY SPL.P.P
PAVITHRA N HIGH COURT BUILDING
Location: BENGALURU - 560 001.
High Court
of Karnataka ...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
CONSTITUTIION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CRPC PRAYING
TO-UNDERSIGNED COUNSEL HUMBLY PRAYS TO EXEMPT THE
PETITIONER FROM THE PAYMENT OF THE COST OF THE ESCORT AS
IMPOSED BY THE LEARNED TRIAL COURT IN SC NO. 1468/2010 VIDE
ORDER DTD 05.04.2024 AT ANNEXURE-A ALTERNATIVELY TO GRANT
CUSTODY PAROLE FOR THE 5 DAYS BETWEEN 30TH APRIL 2024 TO
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:16789
WP No. 11894 of 2024
4TH MAY 2024 AS PRAYED IN THE MEMO DTD 05.04.2024 AT
ANNEXURE-D TO THE PETITIONER IN SC 1478/2010 FOR THE
OFFENSES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 121, 121A, 120-B, 123,
201, 212, 326, 302, 435, 307, 435 OF THE IPC AND UNDER
SECTIONS, 10, 11, 13, 16, 18, 19 AND 20 OF UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES
(PREVENTION) ACT 1967 SEC 3,4,5,6 OF THE EXPLOSIVE
SUBSTANCE ACT 1908, SEC 4 AND 5 OF DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC
PROPERTIES ACT PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF XLIX ADDL. CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF NIA
CASES) (CCH-50) AT BANGALORE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Petitioner, who is an under trial prisoner is before this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking for the following reliefs:-
PRAYER "Undersigned counsel humbly prays to exempt the petitioner from the payment of the cost of the escort as imposed by the learned trial court in SC no 1468/2010 vide order dated 05/04/2024 at ANNEXURE-A and alternatively, to grant custody parole for the 5 days between 30th April 2024 to 4th May 2024 as prayed in the memo dated 05/04/2024 at ANNEXURE-D, to the petitioner in S.C 1478/2010 for the offenses punishable under -3- NC: 2024:KHC:16789 WP No. 11894 of 2024 sections 121, 121 A, 120-B, 123, 201,212,326, 302, 435, 307, 435, of the Indian Penal Code and under sections, 10,11, 13, 16, 18,19 and 20 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967, Section 3,4,5.6 of the Explosive substance Act 1908, Section 4 & 5 of Destruction of Public Properties Act pending before the court of XLIX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Judge for Trial of NIA Cases) (CCH-50) at Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Petitioner is facing trial before the Court of XLIX Additional City Civil and Session Judge (Special Judge for Trial of NIA cases), Bengaluru in S.C.No.1478/2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 121, 121A, 120B, 123, 201, 212, 326, 302, 435, 307, 435 of IPC, Sections 10, 11, 13, 16, 18, 19 and 20 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Sections 4 and 5 of Destruction of Public Properties Act. He had filed a Memo before the Trial Court seeking permission of the Court to attend the marriage of his daughter Ms. Amina which is scheduled to be held from 30.04.2024 at Municipal Town Hall North Paravoor, Ernakulam, Kerala. The said -4- NC: 2024:KHC:16789 WP No. 11894 of 2024 application was opposed by the prosecution by filing objections. The Trial Court has allowed the said application vide order dated 05.04.2024 imposing certain conditions. While imposing conditions, the trial Court has observed that the petitioner is permitted to attend the marriage of his daughter with proper escort at his own cost subject to availability of police escort. Being aggrieved by this condition, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that as per Rule 191 (3) (g) of the Karnataka Prisons Rules, 1974, the petitioner is only required to meet the expenses of to and fro journey. However, demand is being raised to meet the expenses of the entire escort team and also to pay their salary. He submits that petitioner is in custody for the last 15 years and financial condition of his family is not good and therefore, it is not possible for him to meet the demand that is being raised by the State. He submits that on the earlier two occasions of his travel under parole, -5- NC: 2024:KHC:16789 WP No. 11894 of 2024 demand was raised for payment of Rs.2 lakhs and above and therefore, this writ petition is filed.
4. Learned HCGP on the other hand submits that there is a Government Notification dated 16.03.2021 specifying particulars of the demand which the prisoner is required to pay whenever he is escorted by the police team at his request. He submits that in the event any relaxation is made in the case of the petitioner, the same is likely to be a precedent which would cause loss to the exchequer of the State.
5. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is in custody for the last 15 years. It is also not in dispute that he is an under trial prisoner. Memo is filed by him before the Trial Court with a prayer to permit him to attend the marriage of his daughter Ms.Amina scheduled to be held in Kerala. He has made a statement on oath that his financial condition is not good and if he is asked to pay the charges as prescribed under the -6- NC: 2024:KHC:16789 WP No. 11894 of 2024 Notification issued by the Government virtually he will not be able to enjoy the benefits of the order.
6. Rule 191(3)(g) of the Karnataka Prisons Rules, 1974, provides for release of the petitioner under Section 56 of the Rules and under Rule 191(3)(g), it is specifically mentioned that the prisoner is required to meet the expenses of the journey to and fro. However, learned HCGP has placed reliance on the Government Order dated 16.03.2021 which provides that the prisoner is required to pay charges as mentioned in the said order for the purpose of providing him police escort.
7. Be that as it may, without going into the merits and demerits of the contentions raised by both the parties, it is suffice that in the present case having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the financial condition of the petitioner, as an exception, the State shall collect only to and fro journey expenses from the petitioner and all other charges as mentioned in the -7- NC: 2024:KHC:16789 WP No. 11894 of 2024 Government order dated 16.03.2021, excluding the to and fro journey expenses, could be waived off.
8. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE DN