Allowed

Isak Alias Ichu v. the State

Karnataka HC1 Mar 2024CRL.P/1330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second successive Section 439 bail petition by accused No.2 in a tempo robbery case involving cash of Rs.2,15,000. The High Court granted bail on parity with co-accused No.1 who had already been granted bail despite similar allegations, noting the petitioner's long custody and delayed trial.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in SC No.73/2023 on personal bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering, similar offences, delay, and leaving jurisdiction without permi

Isak Alias Ichu Vs the State — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:8634 CRL.P No. 1330 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1330 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

ISAK ALIAS ICHU AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, S/O JAFAR SADIQ, R/AT NAVONDE HOUSE, NAGOR BILLING MANE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201.

¶9

PERMANENTLY,

¶10

R/AT BANNABETTU CROSS, BELIYURE, KARWEL POST, UPPINANGADY, BANTWAL, MANGALORE - 574 211.

¶11

Digitally signed by V KRISHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

AND:

¶13

(BY SRI HALEEMA AMEEN,ADVOCATE)

¶14

…PETITIONER

¶15

THE STATE BY KANKANADY TOWN POLICE STATION, MANGALORE. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560001.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SMT ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)

¶18

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:8634 CRL.P No. 1330 of 2024

¶21

CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.73/2023 (CR.NO.30/2022 OF KANKANADY TOWN POLICE STATION) ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANGALORE D.K. DISTRICT, REGISTERED FOR OFFENCE P/U/S 341, 324, 394, 397, 307 AND 120B R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC. 4, 25-1(B)(b) OF ARMS ACT, 1959. THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K. MANGALURU HAS DISMISSED THE BAIL PETITION ON 02.05.2023 IN CRL.MISC.NO.354/2023, ETC.,

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This is a second successive bail petition filed by the petitioner - accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge him on bail in SC No.73/2023 pending on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, arising out of Cr. No.30/2022 of Kankanady Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 424, 594, 597, 307 and 120B r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 4 and 25-1(B)(b) of Arms Act.

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶26

High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

¶27

The case of the prosecution is that, one Mustaf filed

¶28

a complaint in the police on 05.03.2022 alleging that on the

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:8634 CRL.P No. 1330 of 2024

¶30

said date at around 5.55 a.m., when the complainant and others were proceeding in a tempo in order to purchase fish, they also carried Rs.2,15,000/- cash in his purse. When they reached near the spot, a red car overtook the tempo and intercepted the tempo, two persons got down from the car with weapons and asked to give money. When the complainant refused to give the money, the accused persons said to be assaulted him with weapons by causing injury and robbed the cash of Rs.2,15,000/-. After registering FIR, the Police took up investigation, arrested this petitioner on 05.04.2022. The bail petition was rejected by the trial Court and also this Court twice. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that

¶32

the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged and he is in custody for almost two years. Hence, he prays for granting bail.

¶33

Per contra , the learned High Court Government Pleader has seriously objected the petition and contended that the petitioner is habitual offender. He has involved in various such cases and complaints are registered against the petitioner

¶34

¶35

NC: 2024:KHC:8634 CRL.P No. 1330 of 2024

¶36

in so many Districts and if he is granted bail, there is every possibility of absconding from the case and committing of similar offences further is not ruled out. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the bail petition.

¶37

Heard the arguments. Perusal of the records,

¶38

though the case is registered against unknown person the petitioner was arrested by the Sampigehalli Police in Cr. No.58/2022 on 05.04.2022 and on the confession statement given by this petitioner, he was implicated in this case. The earlier bail petition of the petitioner was rejected by this Court. Subsequently, this Court granted bail to the accused No.1, who is also having similar allegations and also various cases against him in various districts of Karnataka. Petitioner is in custody for almost 22 months. The co-accused who is having similar allegations, has been granted bail by this Court. The trial is not yet began due to pendency of various cases throughout the State against the petitioner.

¶39

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, since similar allegations were made against the accused No.1 who has been granted bail by this Court in Crl. P.

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:8634 CRL.P No. 1330 of 2024

¶42

No.11241/2023 dated 31.01.2024, therefore, this petitioner - accused No.2 is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity by imposing certain conditions. Accordingly, the following order:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(i) The petition is allowed.;

¶45

(ii) The trial Court is directed to release the petitioner - accused No.1 on bail in SC No.73/2023 pending on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, arising out of Cr. No.30/2022 of Kankanady Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 424, 594, 597, 307 and 120B r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 4 and 251(B)(b) of Arms Act, subject to the following conditions:-

¶46

(a) Petitioner shall execute personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;

¶47

(b) Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly;

¶48

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:8634 CRL.P No. 1330 of 2024

¶49

¶50

(d) Petitioner shall take the trial without causing any delay; and

¶51

(e) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court, except attending the Court out side places, without prior permission.

¶52

If any of the conditions are violated, the prosecution is at

¶53

liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶54

Sd/JUDGE

¶55

VK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Isak Alias Ichu v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Isak Alias Ichu v. the State

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

R Bharathesh Vs H a Bhaskar Prasanna

Sri N C Shivakumar Vs State of Karnataka

Ravindra Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Manjunatha B J Vs State by

D Venkatesh Vs State of Karnataka

Avinash v P Vs State by K R Pete Rural Police