Karnataka High Court
Shri.Dawood Ibrahim S/O Hajaratali ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 August, 2019
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K. Somashekar
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20 T H DAY OF AUGUST 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101434/2019
BETWEEN
SHRI.DAWOODLK I BRAHIM S/O HAJARATALI HUBBALLI ,
AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O:JAVAL GALLI, GADAG, TQ:DIST:GADAG.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SABEEL AHMED, ADV.)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH GADAG TOWN POLI CE STATION,
GADAG, DISG: GADAG,
NOW REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF K ARNATAKA, DHARWAD.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ALLOW THE
PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PET ITIONER/ACCUSED
ON REGULAR BAI L IN CRIME NO.81/2019 OF GADAG
TOWN POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
504,413,149,307,148,147,323 OF IPC.
:2:
THIS CRIMINAL 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 the respondent-State.
2. In this petition seeking regular bail relating to the case in Crime No.81/2019 of Gadag Town Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 504,143,149,307,148,147,323 of IPC. Since from the date of arrest, the accused is in judicial custody. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner is seeking for regular bail among the grounds urged therein.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitting :3: that the accused is an innocent person and he has not committed the alleged offences, despite of that, he has been lugged in the alleged crime, alleging that he was also proceeded to take away the life of the injured. There are no specific overt acts attributed against this accused and there is no complicity of crime against this accused and the injured is already discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that the accused is in the judicial custody from the date of his arrest and the accused is not required to the Investigating Agency in any further; if the accused is kept behind the bar for a longer period, the family members of the accused will loose their bread winner to eke out their livelihood and also will be ruined in the society, the counsel further submits that the complainants, who had came in a very high speed and in negligence manner :4: and he picked up a quarrel with the accused to parking the vehicle in front of his house, but on 04.07.2019, the complainant and his friends came to the place of the accused and picked up a quarrel, but after intervention of the local persons in that area that they went away from the scene of crime, but the complainant later himself took his friends and again quarreled with the petitioner/accused, the FIR said to be recorded by the police, thereafter, proceed with the case for investigation, but the case is still under investigation by the Investigating Officer. However, there is no direct overt act attributed against the petitioner for the alleged offences. He is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail to him. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner is praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
:5:
4. Per contra, the learned HCGP for the respondent - State, who has taken me through the averments made in the complaint, the same has been reveals in the FIR said to recorded by the police and thereafter, proceeded with the case for investigation, but this accused as well as the other accused persons were formed unlawful assembly by holding deadly weapons as knife causing injury to injured, namely, Abdul Modensab Dotihal. This accused as well as other accused made an attempt to take away the life of the injured by using the deadly weapon of knife and also infliction of injury on the vital parts, which indicates in the wound certificate issued by the Doctor on 6.08.2019. The same has been produced by the learned HCGP for the purpose of perusal. However, the learned HCGP in further submitting that the subsequent to :6: registration of the crime against the accused, the case is still under investigation by the Investigating Officer and also it requires to record the statements of the witnesses as well as to secure the material documents. Therefore, if the accused is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and destroy the evidence. These are all the grounds urged by the learned HCGP for the State and seeking for dismissal of the bail petition filed by the petitioner.
5. Having regard to the contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner stated supra, it is relevant to state that, this petitioner being arraigned as accused No.1, and others in all 10 accused have committed alleged offences, as where the accused have unlawfully assembled, by holding deadly :7: weapons and assaulted the injured which caused injuries, which indicates in the wound certificate issued by Doctor such as 1) punch lobed marks over lateral chest and back lint sick 2) abrasion scalp. However, these injuries are opinioned by Doctor that the injury Nos. 1 and 2 are simple in nature. At a cursory glance of the material available on record, it is relevant to state that the accused ventured to take away the life of the injured by using deadly weapons as knife, However, the case is still under investigation by the Investigating Officer and also to secure the material documents relating to the injuries inflicted on the injured person. Therefore, at this stage, it is said that it does not require any detailed discussion, while considering the bail petition filed by the petitioner, as there are substances in the contention of the learned counsel for the :8: petitioner seeking for the relief of bail. Whereas, the learned HCGP submits that, if the petitioner is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and destroy the evidence. As this apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP, could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution.
6. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as under the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby allowed, subject to the following conditions::9:
(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
with two like sum sureties to the satisfaction of the court below as where the case in Crime No.81/2019 of Gadag Town P.S. is pending i.e., I Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) & JMFC, Gadag.
(2) The petitioner shall not tamper or hamper the case of prosecution witnesses.
(3) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Gadag District without prior permission of the competent Court.
(4) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a fortnight as per English monthly calendar in between 10 am. To 5 pm. for a period of six months.
(5) The petitioner shall appear
before the concerned court of
law on all the dates of hearing
without fail.
: 10 :
(6) The petitioner shall not indulge with any other criminal activities henceforth.
If the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.
Sd/-
JUDGE VB/-