Karnataka High Court
Rakib H M vs State Of Karnataka on 11 November, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KAR 2202
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P. Sandesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4430/2020
BETWEEN:
RAKIB H.M.
S/O H.M. RUPAIHAWLADER,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
RESIDING AT No.36, KOMURGOLI
FAKIRAPOL, ARAMBAG
MOTIJHEEL DHAKA
BANGLADESH - 1205. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BIAL POLICE STATION
DEVANAHALLI
REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001. ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. B. J. ROHITH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING THIS COURT TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER
ON BAIL IN CR.NO.03/2020 OF BIAL P.S., BENGALURU FOR THE
2
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 416, 370 OF IPC
AND SECTIONS 12(1A) OF PASSPORTS ACT AND 14 OF
FOREIGNERS ACT. THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, DEVANAHALLI
HAS DISMISSED THE BAIL PETITION ON 13.08.2020 IN
CRL.MISC.15098/2020.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner/accused No.1 in Crime No.3/2020 of Bial Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 416, 370 of IPC, Section 12(1A) of the Passports Act, 1967 and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/ State.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that on the midnight of 09/10-01-2020, this petitioner was indulged in committing the 3 forgery of passport and tried to board the flight depart to Kulalalmpur, Malaysia by Flight No.6E-1813 and the same was noticed by the Airport Officials. The photo in the passport did not match with her Indian and Malaysia visa as well. Hence, a case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 416, 370 of IPC, Section 12(1A) of the Passports Act, 1967 and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The police have also investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that a false complaint was lodged and there was a delay of more than 11 hours in reporting the confirmation. This petitioner is in custody and custodial trial is not required. Hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/ State would submit that, the petitioner was indulged in fabricating of the document and also not the resident of India and the resident of Bangladesh and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is chances of fleeing 4 away from the justice. This Court in Criminal Petition No.6578/2019, considering the offence under the Foreigners Act held that a direction can be issued for early disposal of the matter. Hence, the discretion cannot be exercised by this Court.
6. Having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/ State and an allegation is that forged passport used and tried to board the flight based on the same and the fact that the petitioner is the permanent resident of Dhaka is also not in dispute and also invoked the offence under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. When such being the case, when this Court in detail dealt with the matter, it is appropriate to direct the Trial Court to dispose of the matter with time bound as held in the Order of this Court. Hence, it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion to grant bail in favour of the petitioner.
5
7. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER The bail petition is rejected. However, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of the matter as early as possible as held in the order of this Court in Criminal Petition No.6578/2019.
Sd/-
JUDGE cp*