Allowed

Abdul Razak v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Oct 2024CRL.P/10499/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail petition by accused No.6 in a dacoity-preparation case involving a stolen vehicle; he was alleged to habitually receive stolen property under Section 413 IPC. The court noted his prolonged custody of over one-and-a-half years, completed investigation, charge sheet filed, and co-accused already granted bail, and allowed bail with conditions including bonds, no similar offences, and non

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions against similar offences, leaving jurisdiction, tampering with witnesses.

Abdul Razak Vs the State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:41829 CRL.P No. 10499 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10499 OF 2024 (439(Cr.PC) /

¶7

483(BNSS)-)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

ABDUL RAZAK S/O LATE. MOHAMMED SHET AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT, NO.17/2, RATHINAMMAL COLONY 2ND STREET, AZAD NAGAR AMINJIKARAI, CHENNAI - 600 029.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SAMPATH KUMAR A V., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by VEDAVATHI A K Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY AREHALLI POLICE STATION HASSAN DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M. M., HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE CR.NO.50/2022(S.C.NO.56/2023) REGISTERED IN AREHALLI POLICE STATION, HASSAN DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 399, 402, 379, 413 AND 379 R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN DISTRICT.

¶16

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:41829 CRL.P No. 10499 of 2024

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner /accused No.6 under section 439 of Cr.P.C.(Old) and under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (In short 'BNSS') (New) Act, for granting bail in SC.No.56/2023 arising out of Crime No.50/2022 registered by the Arehalli police station, Hassan district and charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 399, 402, 413 and 379 of IPC.

¶22

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the State.

¶23

The case of the prosecution is that on the suo motu complaint registered by the circle inspector of police, Arehalli, against the petitioner/ accused No.1 and others on 18.06.2022, for the offences under sections 399, 402, and 379 of IPC. It is alleged that when he was on patrolling duty, while conducting the searches of the vehicle, a silver colour Tata Sumo vehicle bearing No.Ka-01-AB-1421 came from Sakaleshapura towards Belur and vehicle went away without stopping and the police said to have chased and stopped the vehicle, and on verifying

¶24

¶25

NC: 2024:KHC:41829 CRL.P No. 10499 of 2024

¶26

the documents was found that it was a stolen vehicle and also said to be preparation for committing the dacoit. The vehicle was seized, accused was arrested and they have been remanded for judicial custody. During the investigation, it was revealed the stolen property has been received by this petitioner and habitually received the stolen property. Therefore, this petitioner was arrested and he was remanded judicial custody, Section 413 of IPC was invoked by the police against him for judicial custody, since 01.07.2022. The bail petition filed by the petitioner before the Trial Court was dismissed.

¶27

Having heard the arguments and perused the records, this petitioner is in custody from 01.07.2022. The co-accused persons were already granted bail by this court as well as the co-ordinate bench of this court in criminal petition Nos.4134/2023, 6598/2022 and 10268/2022. Though this petitioner's bail petition came to be rejected, now the investigation is completed, charge sheet has been filed, he is said to be habitually receiving the stolen property, which attracts section 413 of IPC and when the main accused was granted bail by this court, this petitioner is only receiver stolen

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:41829 CRL.P No. 10499 of 2024

¶29

property. He is in custody for more than 1 1/2 year, therefore keeping the petitioner in custody will not serve any purpose. The apprehension of the prosecution may be safeguarded by imposing certain conditions if the bail is granted no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution.

¶30

Accordingly, criminal petition is allowed.

¶31

The respondent – Police are directed to release the petitioner/accused No.6 on bail in the event of his arrest for the offences punishable 399, 402, 413 and 379 of IPC. registered by the respondent – Police Station in Crime No.50 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:

¶32

(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Two Lakh only) with two surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

¶33

(ii) Petitioner shall not indulge in similar offences strictly by receiving any stolen properties in future;

¶34

(iii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of this court.

¶35

(iv) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly/ indirectly;

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:41829 CRL.P No. 10499 of 2024

¶38

(v) He shall take the trial without causing any hindrance.

¶39

If any of the above conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of this bail order.

¶40

Sd/- (K.NATARAJAN) JUDGE

¶41

SRK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2 CT:SK

Abdul Razak v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Razak 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

Manjunath R Vs Smt. Roopa Rao B a

Sri v Anil Kumar Vs Sri G Chinnappa Reddy

Sheik Imran Vs State of Karnataka

Kum Prakruthi J Vs Smt Lakshmi Devi

Purushottham Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Shankaranarayana S Vs Smt S Shanthala