Allowed

Sultan @ Sultansab S/O. Modinsabh Mulla v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Mar 2021CRL.P/100424/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka granted bail to two accused persons (Nos. 15 and 19) facing charges of affray, attempt to murder, and murder under the IPC. The court held bail admissible as custodial interrogation was not required since the charge sheet was not yet filed, imposing a bond and conditions against absconding or tampering.

What did the court decide?

Accused ordered to be enlarged on bail on obtaining a bond of Rs. 2,00,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions.

Sultan @ Sultansab S/O. Modinsabh Mulla Vs… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G.UMA

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION No.100424/2021

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SULTAN @ SULTANSAB S/O. MODINSABH MULLA AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. SULTANPUR, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELGAVI-590024

¶8

DASTAGEER S/O.MABUSABH MULLA @ MULTANI AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. SULTANPUR, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELGAVI-590024.

¶9

...PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SRI: S S YADRAMI, ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HUKKERI POLICE REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH-580011. …RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI: RAMESH B.CHIGARI, HCGP)

¶14

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND GRANT BAIL TO THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.15 AND 19, ORDER TO RELEASE THEM ON BAIL, IN HUKKERI P.S. CR.NO.159/2020 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 323, 324, 307, 302 AND 143, 147, 148, 504 AND 506 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUKKERI.

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The petitioners-accused Nos.15 and 19 are before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.159/2020 of Hukkeri Police Station, initially registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 307, 302, 504, 506 read with 149 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC' for the sake of brevity) on the basis of first information lodged by the informant Sri.Altaf Gulab Mulla.

¶19

Brief facts of the case are that, the informant lodged the first information with Hukkeri police against accused Nos.1 to 19 stating that his uncle Basheer and accused No.1 have contested for Gram Panchayat election in ward No.3 of Sultanpur Gram Panchayat. On 30/2/2020, the counting of the votes was completed and uncle of the

¶20

¶21

informant Basheer was declared elected. Accused No.1 was defeated in the election. On the said date, the informant and other close relatives and friends have celebrated the victory of his uncle Basheer. On the same day, at 10.00 p.m., when the informant and three others were near their house, accused Nos.1 to 19 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, with an intention to cause the death of informant and others, armed with deadly weapons, came to the spot, abused the informant and his uncle in filthy language and accused No.1 assaulted Shahanoor Mulla with an axe. Accused No.2Saleem Mulla assaulted the informant with iron rod and caused injures. All the other accused have assaulted the injured with their hands and legs. When the injured raised hue and cry, other neighboring persons came to the spot. Accused criminally intimidated to take away their life and left the place.

¶22

It is stated that the injured Mustak and Shanoor were shifted to Vijaya Ortho hospital in Belgaum, where injured Shanoor succumbed to the injuries on the next day. Therefore, case under Section 302 of IPC was also registered

¶23

¶24

against the accused. It is stated that the present petitionersaccused Nos.15 and 19 were apprehended on 31/12/2020 and on 21/01/2021 respectively. Since then, they are in judicial custody.

¶25

Heard Sri.S.S.Yadrami, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Ramesh B.Chigari learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted

¶27

that the petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.15 and 19 and they are innocents and law abiding persons. The allegations made against them are that they have assaulted the inured with hands. There is no allegation of using any weapons in commission of offence by these petitioners. The main allegation is against accused Nos.1 and 2 only. The death of the deceased could not be attributed to the act of present petitioners. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is yet to be filed. The detention of the petitioners in custody is not required for any other purpose, except to ensure their presence before the Trial Court. He

¶28

¶29

submits that the petitioners are the permanent residents of the address mentioned in the cause title to the petition and are ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for allowing the petition.

¶30

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the present petitioners for having committed the offence. The accused forming themselves into an unlawful assembly with a common object of committing crime, assaulted the informant and others which has resulted in the death of the deceased. Investigation is not yet completed and the charge sheet is not yet filed. If the present petitioners are released on bail, they may commit similar offences and they may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶31

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arises for my consideration is:

¶32

¶33

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶34

My answer to the above point is in the ‘Affirmative’ for the following reasons:

¶35

The allegations made against the accused are of serious nature. The names of these petitioners are specifically mentioned in the first information for the commission of offence. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that they are falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. However, admittedly these petitioners are not required for custodial interrogation as charge sheet is already filed. Their detention in custody would amount to pretrial punishment. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions which will take care of the apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioners may abscond or tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

The petition is allowed.

¶38

¶39

The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.159/2020 of Hukkeri Police Station on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the

¶40

jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶41

a). The petitioners shall not commit similar offences.

¶42

b). The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶43

c). The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court as and when required.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

Vmb

Sultan @ Sultansab S/O. Modinsabh Mulla v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sultan @ Sultansab S/O. Modinsabh Mulla v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yallappa S/O. Neelappa Doddamani Vs Santosh S/O. Balappa Danammanavar

The City Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd. Vs Ram Gajanan Khatavkar

Erappa S/O Late Thimmappa Vs the State of Karnataka

State of Karnataka Vs Vinayak S/O Ganesh Naik

State of Karnataka Vs Manjunath S/O Shanmukh Talawar

State of Karnataka Vs Devendra Putu S/O Nagesh Siddi