Dismissed

Mr Rippon Shaik Alias Riyan v. National Investigation Agency

Karnataka HC30 Oct 2024CRL.A/7/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal against rejection of second bail application under NIA Act for illegal immurbation and trafficking offences. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that no changed circumstances existed to overturn the first bail rejection based on the serious nature of the charges and substantial prosecution evidence.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal was dismissed; bail application remains rejected.

Mr Rippon Shaik Alias Riyan Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:44070-DB CRL.A No. 07 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶8

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.07 OF 2024 (21(NIA))

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MR. RIPPON SHAIK ALIAS RIYAN AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O. KALAM SHAIK, R/AT NO.35, 1^ST CROSS, VADDARA PALYA, NEAR GOVT. SCHOOL, UTTARAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 061.

¶11

PERMANENT ADDRESS: NOVAPADA VILLAGE, POLICE STATION, ABHAI NAGAR, JESSOR DISTRICT, BANGLADESH. ... APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI NAGABHUSHAN R., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY BENGALURU, REP. BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶16

... RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR, SPL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 21(4) OF NIA ACT CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN R.C.NO.16/2021/NIA/DLI AFTER INVESTIGATION CHARGE SHEET WAS FILED WHICH NOW BEEN NUMBERED AS SPL.C.NO.1416/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE NIA BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120B,370,343 OF IPC AND SEC.14 OF FOREIGNERS ACT SEC.3, 4, 5, 6, 7 OF IMMORAL TRAFFIC PREVENTION ACT PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF XLIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (SPL.JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES) AT BENGALURU.

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:44070-DB CRL.A No. 07 of 2024

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL and

¶22

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

(PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL)

¶25

Heard both sides.

¶26

Challenging the rejection of his petition for bail, accused No.14 in Special Case No.1416/2021 on the file of the XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, (Special Court for Trial of NIA Cases), Bengaluru has preferred this appeal.

¶27

Appellant and 19 others are being tried in Special Case No.1416/2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 370, 343, 465, 471 read with Section 120B of IPC, Sections 14A and 14C of the Foreigners Act, 1946, Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, Section 3 of Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 r/w Rule 6 of the Passport (Entry into India) Rules, 1950 on the basis of the charge sheet filed by the NIA, Hyderabad. The allegation against the accused

¶28

is that during investigation in a gang rape case in Bengaluru, the statements of several witnesses revealed that the accused

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:44070-DB CRL.A No. 07 of 2024

¶30

were trafficking the girls from Bangladesh for prostitution in Bengaluru, Hyderabad and across South India. Based on that, Ramamurthy Nagar Police registered Crime No.185/2021 against 20 accused.

¶31

During the course of the investigation, the matter was transferred to National Investigating Agency. NIA police conducted investigation and filed charge sheet for the aforesaid offences. The appellant filed similar application before the Trial Court seeking bail and it was rejected on 13.03.2023 on merits. therefore, he filed the second application. The Trial Court, hearing both sides, by the impugned judgment and order rejected the said application.

¶32

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been in judicial custody since 20.02.2022, the trial may take considerable time, there is no concrete material to show his involvement in the case, therefore, the Trial Court ought to have exercised its discretion to grant him bail.

¶33

Learned Special Public Prosecutor submits that since the earlier application for bail was rejected on merits, the same could be granted only if any changed circumstances exist,

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:44070-DB CRL.A No. 07 of 2024

¶35

but no changed circumstances are made out. He further submits that after the rejection of his first application, P.Ws.17, 20, 21 and 22 were examined and they have identified the appellant and deposed about his overt acts, that further aggravates the matter against the appellant. Therefore, there is no merit in the appeal.

¶36

As rightly pointed out by the learned Special Public Prosecutor, once the first bail application is rejected on merits, in successive application the accused can seek bail only if any changed circumstances are made out. As can be made out from the impugned order, the only changed circumstance urged before the Trial court was that the appellant had been in judicial custody for a long time and the Trial may take considerable time. The said contention is rejected by the Trial Court rightly on the ground that the offence under Section 370 of IPC is punishable for imprisonment for life, therefore, the principle that if the accused is in judicial custody for more than 50% of the prescribed sentence, he shall be released on bail does not apply.

¶37

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:44070-DB CRL.A No. 07 of 2024

¶38

8. Learned Special Public Prosecutor submits that out

¶39

of 130 charge sheet witnesses 70 witnesses are examined and therefore, the major part of the trial is already concluded. Copies of the deposition of P.Ws.17, 20, 21 and 22 are produced by the learned Special Public Prosecutor to show that those witnesses have deposed that the appellant trafficking them from Bangladesh, gave them aadhar cards purportedly issued to them by the Indian Government in their names. As per the prosecution records, the appellant himself is illegal immigrant from Bangladesh. Having regard to the gravity of matter and the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed.

¶40

Sd/(K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE

¶41

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

¶42

MBM

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

Mr Rippon Shaik Alias Riyan v. National Investigation Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Rippon Shaik Alias Riyan v. National Investigation Agency

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

P.R. Nagarathna @ Kavya Vs Yogish Kutkunje Pai

Sri Pramod Vs Sujay Kamath

B M Venkatesh Vs M/S the New India Ass.Co Ltd.

State of Karnataka Vs Rangappa Bovi

Mr. Shaik Sadiq Ali Vs State by K.G. Halli Ps

The Divisional Controller Vs Ramesh