Allowed

Allauddin S/O Mahamedjafar Rajabali v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Nov 2024CRL.P/103269/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge High Court of Karnataka allowed regular bail for the petitioner, accused No.2 in a serious cheque-related murder charge case, noting no incriminating material linked to him and lack of identification by witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail subject to bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties and conditions to appear in court and not tamper with witnesses.

Allauddin S/O Mahamedjafar Rajabali Vs the… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:17070 CRL.P No. 103269 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

DHARWAD BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103269 OF 2024

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

ALLAUDDIN S/O MAHAMEDJAFAR RAJABALI AGE. 27 YEARS OCC. HOTEL WORK R/AT. IBRAMHIMPUR HAVERI, KARNATAKA - 581 202.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADV.)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA SUB URBAN POLICE STATION DHARWAD, DIST. DHARWAD REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 ON BAIL IN S.C. NO.60/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF 4 TH ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT DHARWAD AS ATTACHED IN SUB URBAN POLICE STATION, DHARWAD IN CRIME NO.118/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 120B, 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 304, 201, 212 OF THE IPC AND U/S 25 OF ARMS ACT.

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

NC: 2024:KHC-D:17070 CRL.P No. 103269 of 2024

¶22

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶25

Accused No.2 in S.C.No.60/2023 pending before the Court of IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad arising out of Crime No.118/2023 registered by Sub-urban Police Station, Dharwad District for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 201 304, 212 R/w 149 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act is before this Court seeking regular bail.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶27

parties.

¶28

FIR in Crime No.118/2023 was registered by

¶29

Sub-urban Police Station, Dharwad District initially for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 302, 307 R/w 34 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, on the basis of first information dated 26.05.2023 received from Sri Abbasali Kudachi, who is the son of deceased Mohammedsa Kudachi against one Arbaz and

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17070 CRL.P No. 103269 of 2024

¶31

others. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.05.2023. Investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet has been filed against nine persons. The petitioner herein is arraigned as accused No.2 in the charge sheet filed for the aforesaid offences.

¶32

The bail application filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in S.C.No.60/2023 was dismissed on 01.03.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶34

submits that the accused Nos.3 and 5 have been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.102215/2024 and accused Nos.4 and 6 have been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.100965/2024. The petitioner, who is arraigned as accused No.2 in the charge sheet allegedly had fired from his pistol on the deceased and also had thrown chilly powder on his face on the date of incident. The deceased has not received any gunshot injury. The

¶35

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17070 CRL.P No. 103269 of 2024

¶36

material on record would go to show that there were no signs at the spot of any firing from the pistol. He submits that the spot inspection report would go to show that there was no trace of chilly powder being thrown by accused persons before assaulting the deceased and injured. The petitioner's name is not found in the FIR and he has not been identified by any of the eye witnesses in the present case. The petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶37

Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition. He submits that name of accused Nos.1 and 2 have been mentioned in the FIR and the first informant is an injured eye witness in the present case. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶38

In the first information the injured eye witness has spoken to the presence of five persons in the place of incident. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against nine persons and allegation is made

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17070 CRL.P No. 103269 of 2024

¶40

as against seven persons about assaulting deceased and injured.

¶41

In the first information dated 26.05.2023 it is

¶42

averred that at about 10.30 to 11.00 p.m, five strangers came to the house of the first informant and after quarrelling with his father one amongst them threw chilly powder on the face of the first informant's father and a person by name Raheem took out a revolver and fired at the first informant's father. Accused No.1 allegedly assaulted the first informant's father Mohammedsa

¶43

Kudachi on his stomach and other parts of the body. Two other strangers who are present at the spot also assaulted Mohammedsa Kudachi with deadly weapons.

¶44

The postmortem report of Mohammedsa Kudachi would go to show that, he has not suffered any bullet injury on his body. It is specifically mentioned that no bullet injury was seen over the body of the deceased.

¶45

Even in the spot inspection mahazar it is specifically mentioned that, there were no signs of bullet fired from

¶46

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17070 CRL.P No. 103269 of 2024

¶47

the revolver and it also does not mention about any traces of chilly powder being found at the spot.

¶48

Undisputedly, the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. In the first information is stated that along with accused No.1 Arbaz, another person by name Raheem was present. The petitioner has not been identified in the manner known to law by any of the alleged eye witness in the present case. Accused Nos.3 to 6 have been granted regular bail by this Court. The petitioner is in custody from 28.05.2023. Trial in the case is yet to commence. The prosecution in all has cited 66 charge sheet witnesses. Therefore, chances of trial being completed in the immediate near future is very remote.

¶49

Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that, the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively.

¶50

Accordingly, the following:

¶51

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17070 CRL.P No. 103269 of 2024

¶52

ORDER

¶53

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.60/2023 pending before the Court of IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad arising out of Crime No.118/2023 registered by Sub-urban Police Station, Dharwad District for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 201 304, 212 R/w 149 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Ac, subject to the following conditions:

¶54

a) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶55

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶56

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17070 CRL.P No. 103269 of 2024

¶57

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the

¶58

prosecution witnesses;

¶59

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶60

SD/(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶61

NMS

Allauddin S/O Mahamedjafar Rajabali v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Allauddin S/O Mahamedjafar Rajabali 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

Rajkumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Rajashekar and Ors. Vs Government of Karnataka

Sajid @ Mohammad Sajid Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Imamsab S/O Manthralli Hussainsab Vs State of Karnataka

Akash Vs the State of Karnataka by Janwad Police

Sangharsh Alias Sangappa S/O Kushab Kamble Vs the State of Karnataka