Karnataka High Court
Mr Jakir @ Jakeer Hussain vs The State Of Karnataka By on 21 July, 2020
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2020
BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3271 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
MR. JAKIR @ JAKEER HUSSAIN
S/O ABDUL HAMEED
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O KUNDALA HOUSE
KANNUR VILLAGE
MANGALORE - 575 001.
... PETITIONER
[BY SRI. DINESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE]
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
MANGALORE RURAL POLICE STATION
MANGALORE - 575 001.
... RESPONDENT
[BY SRI. VINAYAK V.S., HCGP]
***
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.
NO.65/2012 OF MANGALORE RURAL P.S., MANGALORE DISTRICT
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.143, 144, 147, 148, 302, 109, 116, 120B
R/W SEC.149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE AT PRINCIPAL BENCH,
BENGALURU, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State.
2. The petition is filed by accused No.3 in the split up case in C.C. No.152/2019 on the file of JMFC III Court, Mangaluru. Charge sheet is filed for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 302, 109, 120(B), r/w 149 of IPC.
3. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 13.03.2012 deceased Abdul Rehman @ Sanna Puttu had been to a play ground near Kannur Check Post for playing cricket. At about 7.00 p.m his brother namely Ummer Farooq received a phone call from one Razak informing him that the said Abdul Rehman has been assaulted and he is lying in a pool of blood. Immediately, he went to the spot and shifted his brother Abdul Rehman to the hospital, wherein the doctor declared that he was brought dead. It is the case of the prosecution that at the instigation of accused Nos.7 to 19, accused Nos.1 to 6 assaulted the 3 deceased with deadly weapons and committed his murder on account of some previous enmity.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially the present petitioner who is shown as accused No.7 in the charge sheet was granted bail. However, subsequently he did not appear before the trial Court and therefore NBW came to be issued. The petitioner could not appear before the trial Court for bonafide reasons. However, he has voluntarily appeared before the trial Court on 17.02.2020 and now he is languishing in judicial custody. He submits that against some of the accused trial was held and accused Nos.1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 to 15, 18 and 19 have been acquitted. He submits that a split charge sheet has been filed against the present petitioner. He submits that even according to the prosecution, the role played by the present petitioner is that he instigated and similarly placed accused No.12 has already been enlarged on bail. Hence, he submits that by imposing any condition the petitioner may be released on bail.
4
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently contends that the petitioner has deliberately remained absent for more than seven years and he has delayed the process of trial. The split charge sheet has been filed against him and in the event of grant of bail to the petitioner he will once again abscond and therefore he seeks to reject the petition. 6. According to prosecution accused Nos.1 to 6 assaulted the deceased with deadly weapons and accused Nos.7 to 19 have instigated the said accused to commit murder. It is not in dispute that some of the accused are already acquitted. The petitioner was initially arrested on 19.03.2012 and he was granted bail. Since, some of the accused did not appear before the trial Court a split up case was registered against them. Similarly placed A12 is granted bail by the Session Court. The petitioner has voluntarily appeared before the Session Court on 17.02.2020 and since then he is in judicial custody. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, 5 I am of the view that the petitioner can be enlarged on bail, subject to conditions. Hence, the following:
ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.65/2012 of Mangaluru Rural Police (C.C.No.152/2019 on the file of JMFC III Court, Mangaluru) charge sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 302, 109, 120(B), r/w Sec.149 of IPC now pending in S.C.No.29/2019 on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two local sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court where the case is pending.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.6
(iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court unless prior permission from the learned Sessions Judge.
(iv) The petitioner shall furnish his correct address to the Court while executing the bond and he shall intimate the change of address if any.
(v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the concerned police station once in 15 days of every month.
(vi) The petitioner shall be regular in attending the trial proceedings and shall co-operate for the early disposal of the case.
(vii) If any of the above conditions are violated then the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE HB/-