Shompa Khatun Nusrat Jahan vs State Of Karnataka on 14 January, 2022

[Cites 23, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shompa Khatun Nusrat Jahan vs State Of Karnataka on 14 January, 2022

Bench: H.P. Sandesh

                            1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                         BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

            CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7748/2021

BETWEEN:

SHOMPA KHATUN NUSRAT JAHAN
D/O. LATE ABU SAMAD
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
R/AT JAMJAMI VILLAGE
KHUADABAJAR POST
MONIRAMPUR POLICE STATION
JESSORE DISTRICT
KHULNA DIVISION
BANGLADESH - 743446.

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT
ANANDPURA CIRCLE
MARAGONDANAHALLI, K.R. PURAM
BENGALURU-560 067.                            ... PETITIONER

           (BY SRI M. KRISHNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY RAMAMURTHYNAGAR P.S.
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560001.                        ... RESPONDENT

               (BY SRI KRISHNA KUMAR, HCGP)
                                   2



      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
S.C.NO.878/2021 (CR.NO.175/2021) OF RAMAMURTHY NAGAR
P.S.,BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 120B, 201, 204, 323, 324, 343, 366, 366B, 370,
370(A)(2), 376D,376,384,504,506 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SEC.67A
OF I.T ACT AND SEC.14 OF FOREIGNERS ACT AND SEC.4,5,9 OF
ITP ACT,


      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.12 in Crime No.175/2021 of Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station, Banaswadi Sub-Division, Bengaluru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 201, 204, 323, 324, 343, 366, 366B, 370, 370(A)(2), 376D, 376, 384, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 67-A of Information Technology Act, 2000, Section 14 of Foreigners Act and Sections 4, 5, 9 of ITP Act. 3

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that, this petitioner came along with resident of Bangladesh i.e., accused No.1 and she indulged in prostitution in making money. This petitioner is arraigned as accused No.12.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and the offence under Section 376-D of IPC does not attract against the petitioner and the petitioner is a women and she is in custody from the last four months. The counsel also submits that in 164 statement of the victim girl, nothing is alleged against this petitioner and the allegation against this petitioner is that she indulged in prostitution and no material to that effect. Hence, she may be enlarged on bail.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that this 4 petitioner is a resident of Bangladesh and she came to India along with accused No.1, who is also a resident of Bangladesh and she indulged in criminal activities along with other accused persons conspiring with each. Hence, she is not entitled for bail.

6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and also taking note of the allegation made in the charge-sheet against this petitioner i.e., she indulged in prostitution and also having perused the 164 statement of the victim girl, no allegation is made against this petitioner. When such being the factual aspects of the case and taking material against this petitioner, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., subject to imposing certain stringent conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution since, the offence under Foreigners Act is also invoked. Hence, I pass the following:-

ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.12 shall be released on bail in Crime 5 No.175/2021 of Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station, Banaswadi Sub-Division, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 201, 204, 323, 324, 343, 366, 366B, 370, 370(A)(2), 376D, 376, 384, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC, Section 67-A of Information Technology Act, 2000, Section 14 of Foreigners Act and Sections 4, 5, 9 of ITP Act, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two 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 her is disposed of.

(v) The petitioner shall mark her attendance once in a month i.e., on 30th of every month between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Jurisdictional Police, till the disposal of the case since, accused is a foreigner.

Sd/-

JUDGE ST

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court