Allowed

Bilal S/O Adam Shaikh v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Sept 2023CRL.P/101765/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision petition under Section 439 CrPC, the High Court of Karnataka granted bail to Accused No. 4 charged with murder and conspiracy. The court постановила that the apprehensions of the state could be met by imposing strict bail conditions, allowing the petitioner to be enlarged on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is granted bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding witness tampering, committing further offences, and appearance in court.

Bilal S/O Adam Shaikh Vs the State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 08^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101765 OF 2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

ROHAN HADIMANI T

¶7

Digitally signed by ROHAN HADIMANI T Date: 2023.09.08 15:37:48 -0700

¶8

BILAL S/O. ADAM SHAIKH, AGE; 34 YEARS, OCC: FABRICATION, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGAR, ANGOL, BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 590003.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI Z.M. HATTARKI AND SRI A.M. MULLA, ADVOCATES)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH TILAKWADI, POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI PRAVEEN UPPER HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO GRANT A BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4, BELAGAVI TILAKWADI POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.08/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SECTION 120(B), 364, 302, 201 R/W 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF XITH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE BELAGAVI IN SESSION CASE NO. 94/2023.

¶16

¶17

IN THIS PETITION, ARGUMENTS BEING HEARD, JUDGMENT RESERVED, COMING ON FOR “PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS” THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner/Accused No.4 has filed this petition under Section 439 of Cr.PC for enlarging him on bail in Crime No.08/2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 302 , 201,120(B) and r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and pending on the file of XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in SC No.94 of 2023.

¶20

In brief, the prosecution's case revolves around a complaint lodged by Smt. Fatima Dawood Khan Pathan on 07^th February, 2023, at the Tilakwadi Police Station, leading to the registration of Crime No. 8 of 2023. The accused are charged with offenses under Section 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The information alleges that Smt. Muskan Imran Shaikh, the informant's younger sister, had a relationship with Accused No. 1, a fact known to the entire family. It is further contended that, under the guise of marriage, Accused No.1 maintained this relationship. When Muskan earnestly requested Accused No.1 to

¶21

¶22

marry her, he declined. Consequently, she suffered emotional distress and informed the informant that Accused No.1 had pressured her into divorcing her husband, leading to her subsequent divorce. It is alleged that the informant and other family members extended an invitation to Accused No. 1 to their residence, urging him to marry Muskan. Regrettably, he declined this proposition, and despite this refusal, Accused No.1 and Muskan continued their relationship. On 20^th August, 2022, at 7:00 am, the informant received a call from her sister, Rahima, inquiring about Muskan's whereabouts. The informant responded negatively and inquired why Rahima had asked such a question. Rahima explained that Muskan had left her home, telling her daughter that she was going to the medical shop at 7:30 pm on 19^th August, 2022, and had not returned since. Further it is alleged that at 8:30 pm, the informant visited the residence of Accused No.1 and engaged in a quarrel with him before leaving the premises. The informant's sister, Smt. Julekha Fairozkhan Pathan, lodged a missing person's report on 22^nd August, 2022. On 05^th February, 2023, at approximately 7:00 pm, near Belagavi Bus Stand, the informant and her

¶23

¶24

nephew, Ijaj Imtiyaz Shaikh, encountered Salim, also known as Mohammedisak Abdulrahim Shiroor, from Goa. In response to Ijaj's inquiry about his missing aunt, he was informed by someone that Accused No.1 had mentioned, "Pinky Ka Kam Khatam Hualo." This shocking revelation was immediately conveyed to the informant.

¶25

Based on the aforementioned facts and allegations, the Tilakwadi Police registered a case under Sections 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code against Accused No.1 in Crime No.8 of 2023. Following this, the petitioner was apprehended on 08^th February, 2023, at 02:40 am, near Nath Pai Kere and subsequently arrested at 03:30 am. On the same day, the petitioner was presented before the relevant Court and has been in judicial custody since.

¶26

The petitioner initially submitted a bail application in Criminal Misc. No.288 of 2023 before the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge in Belagavi; however, it was rejected on 24^th March, 2023. Discontent with this decision, the petitioner withdrew the application. Subsequently, the petitioner filed

¶27

¶28

another bail application before the High Court in Criminal Petition No.100929 of 2023, but it was later withdrawn. Following the completion of the investigation, the petitioner filed a bail application in Criminal Misc. No.568 of 2023 before the same court, which was subsequently rejected on 12^th June, 2023. Consequently, as a result of these developments, the petitioner has now presented this fresh bail application before this Hon'ble Court.

¶29

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER/ACCUSED.NO.4:

¶30

The petitioner vehemently maintains his innocence in

¶31

response to the charges leveled against him. Notably, the First Information Report (FIR) that led to the petitioner's identification as Accused No.4 appears to lack substantial evidence, raising questions about the basis for the accusation. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the FIR was lodged a full six months after the alleged offence took place. Additionally, an examination of the remand application suggests that the case hinges primarily on an alleged extra-judicial confession made to a single individual, giving rise to suspicions regarding potential ulterior motives in

¶32

¶33

implicating the accused. The final report underscores the case's reliance on circumstantial evidence and an extra-judicial confession, both considered weaker forms of evidence. Consequently, this further highlights the absence of any apparent nexus between the petitioner and the deceased.

¶34

The petitioner's purported role in this case is not one of direct participation in the alleged offence. Instead, it is alleged that prior to the commission of the offence, the petitioner had simply retrieved an auto from Inox Theatre to Angol. This crucial detail underscores the lack of the petitioner's involvement in the said crime. Moreover, there is a conspicuous absence of prima facie evidence against the petitioner that would substantiate the alleged offence. Furthermore, the petitioner is not only prepared but also eager to adhere to all conditions that this Hon'ble Court may impose.

¶35

The petitioner counsel in order to substantiate his arguments relied upon the decisions in the case of DATTARAM SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH reported in (2018)3 SCC 22; in the case of SHRIKANTH KALLAPPA KATAKATTI v. STATE in

¶36

¶37

Criminal petition No.100687 of 2020 decided on 12^th August, 2020; and in the case of SIDDAPPA DODDASADEPPA GUNDYAGOL v. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in 2009(6) KAR. L.J. 95.

¶38

There exists no prima facie evidence to substantiate the alleged offenses against the petitioner. The petitioner stands fully prepared and willing to adhere to all conditions set forth by this Court. Furthermore, the petitioner is ready and willing to provide ample surety, as may be required, to the complete satisfaction of this Court and has prayed to allow this petition.

¶39

Respondent-State strongly opposed the petition as the alleged offences are rigorous in nature and are punishable with death sentence.

¶40

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader and perused the prosecution material.

¶41

From the prosecution papers, it becomes evident that the complaint was filed on 07^th February, 2023. According to the

¶42

¶43

contentions made by the prosecution, the alleged incident is said to have occurred on 19^th August, 2022. The complainant, elder sister of deceased, became aware of this incident through Ijahan Imthihaz Sheik, the son of the complainant's sister. Ijahan informed her that on 05^th February, 2022, at around 7:00 pm, Accused No.1-Asif Macchevale, mentioned that when he discussed the disappearance of the deceased Muskan, he said, " Pinky ka kaam katham huvalo ". On the same day, he relayed this information to the complainant, and subsequently, the complaint was lodged at the Tilakwadi Police Station on 07^th February, 2023. Later on statement of accused.No.1 entire story of the prosecution is set up. No doubt, the case is based on the circumstantial evidence, the overt act of the accused No.4 is, in furtherance of conspiracy, he along with Firoz, brought the car bearing No.KA.22/MA.3161 and took back the auto rickshaw bearing No. KA.22/C.0037.

¶44

The petitioner is in judicial custody since 08^th February, 2023 and it is also evident from the records that the charge sheet has already been laid after completion of investigation,

¶45

¶46

and his presence is no more required by the Investigating Agency.

¶47

Considering the facts and circumstances, reports, statements made by the prosecution witnesses, and most importantly, considering the alleged role of the accused in the alleged crime, so also, forceful submissions of the Petitioner’s counsel, in my considered opinion, the petitioner/Accused No.4 can be admitted on bail subject to certain conditions. The apprehensions raised by the learned High Court Government Pleader can be meted-out by imposing conditions. Hence, the petition needs to be allowed and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶48

ORDER

¶49

The petition is allowed;

¶50

The petitioner/Accused No.4 is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.08/2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 302 , 201,120(B) and r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and pending on the file of XI Additional

¶51

¶52

District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in SC No.94 of 2023, on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/(Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, subject to following

¶53

conditions:-

¶54