Karnataka High Court
Mohammed Noushad vs State Of Karnataka on 24 September, 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3454/2019
Between:
Mohammed Noushad
S/o Moideen
Aged about 20 years
R/at Ullanje house
Mennabettu Village
Mangaluru Taluk
D.K.District - 574 150.
Currently in Judicial Custody. ... Petitioner
(By Sri. Sunil S. Rao, Advocate for
Sri. Kashinath J.D., Advocate)
And:
State of Karnataka
By Suratkal Police Station
Mangaluru
Represented by Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka
Bengaluru - 560 001. ... Respondent
(By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
-2-
Cr.No.2/2018 of Suratkal Police Station, Mangaluru
City for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 302,
120B read with 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition is coming on for Orders,
this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The present Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.2/2018 of Surathkal Police Station, Mangaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 302, 120(B) read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.3 and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 03.01.2018, the complainant was working as Assistant Manager at MRPL Power Net at about 1.55 p.m., the complainant got an information that Deepak got -3- assaulted brutally by unknown persons near his working place and he went along with his friend to the place near the house of the owner Abdul Majeed, there was huge gathering of public and found blood stains on the spot. After coming to know the said fact, he enquired and there he came to know that on the same day at about 1.15 p.m., the deceased - Deepak came on his motorbike bearing No.KA-19-EH-6518 and reached near the house of Majeed. At that point of time, a white colour Car came and four persons alighted from the said car and assaulted with deadly weapons and ran way towards Katipalla. On such assault, deceased- Deepak died. On the basis of the complaint, a case was registered and after the investigation, charge sheet has been filed.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.3 that the complaint was registered against unknown persons at the first instance -4- and this Court, under the similar facts and circumstances has already released accused No.4 on bail. On the ground of parity, petitioner/accused No.3 is also entitled to be released on bail. He further submitted that the statement of eyewitnesses have been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. belatedly on 07.03.2018 and names of the accused persons have not been stated. It is further submitted that subsequently, the accused persons have been apprehended, photos of the accused persons have been published in the 'Jayakiran' newspaper on 13.01.2018 and the Test Identification Parade was subsequently held on 08.03.2018. In that light, Test Identification Parade is not having any effect in law. It is his further submission that since 03.01.2018, the petitioner/accused No.3 is languishing in jail and he is ready to abide by any of the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused No.3 on bail. -5-
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused No.3 along with the other accused persons have assaulted the deceased with lethal weapons and there are serious overt acts alleged as against the petitioner/accused No.3 that he has assaulted the deceased with long. It is his further submission that CWs.2 and 3 are the eyewitnesses to the alleged incident and even their statements have also been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. He further submitted that the petitioner/accused No.3 is involved in serious offence, which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and submission made by the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the records.
-6-
7. As could be seen from the contents of the complaint, the name of accused No.3 is not appearing. Even, the records indicating that already accused Nos.4 to 13 have been released on bail. Under similar facts and circumstances of the case, on going through the records, which were made available, it can be seen that the accused persons have arrested on 03.01.2018 and subsequently, the statement of eyewitnesses i.e., CWs.2 and 3 were recorded on 04.01.2018. When the statement of these two witnesses have been recorded belatedly and they have not specifically stated the overt acts of the petitioner/accused No.3, then under such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that on the ground of parity, the petitioner/accused No.3 is entitled to be released on bail.
8. Taking into consideration of the above said facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that by imposing some stringent conditions if the -7- petitioner/accused No.3 is enlarged on bail, it would meet the ends of justice.
9. Accordingly, Criminal Petition is allowed and petitioner/accused No.3 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.2/2018 of Surathkal Police Station, Mangaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 302, 120(B) read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:-
1. The petitioner/accused No.3 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
3. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court without prior permission.
4. He shall be regular in attending the trial on all the dates of hearing.
-8-
5. He shall mark his attendance on first of every month between 10:00 a.m and 5:00 p.m. till the trial is concluded.
6. He shall not indulge in similar type of criminal activities during pendency of the trial. If he again involves in such type of criminal activities, the respondent-State is at liberty to request the trial Court for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE NR/-