Allowed

Sri Mehaboob Khan @ Anu Malik v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Jun 2024CRL.P/2184/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sole accused in a POCSO and IPC case concerning a 16-year-old victim sought regular bail after charge sheet. The court noted his custody since September 2023, absence of criminal antecedents, and granted bail with bond of Rs.2,00,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering and repeat offences.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in Crime No.117/2023 on bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions; breach permits cancellation.

Sri Mehaboob Khan @ Anu Malik Vs the State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:22012 CRL.P No. 2184 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2184 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. MEHABOOB KHAN @ ANU MALIK S/O SRI. ALI KHAN, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT TAJ PALACE, MOGANAHALLI LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE-577 528.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. NANDISH GOWDA G.B., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by V KRISHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY DAVANAGERE WOMEN POLICE, REP. BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU.

¶14

SRI. ROSHAN JAMEER S/O SRI. NAZEER AHMED, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.356, MAYANAHALLI ROAD, 16^TH CROSS, BIDI LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE-577 001

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1;

¶17

R2 SERVED)

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:22012 CRL.P No. 2184 of 2024

¶19

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.729/2023 (CRIME NO.0117/2023) PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I, DAVANAGERE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 366A, 376(2)(n) OF IPC AND U/S 6 OF POCSO ACT.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner-accused is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.117/2023 of Davanagere Women Police Station, pending in Spl.C.No.729/2023, on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Davanagere, registered for the offences punishable under Section 366A, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant viz., Roshan Jameer.

¶23

Heard Sri.Nandish Gowda G.B., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2024:KHC:22012 CRL.P No. 2184 of 2024

¶26

In view of the rival contentions urged by the

¶27

learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶28

“Whether the petitioner is entitled

¶29

for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶30

My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following:

¶31

R E A S O N S

¶32

The petitioner being the sole accused is seeking

¶33

grant of bail. He was apprehended on 21.09.2023 and since then, he is in judicial custody. The father of the victim lodged the first information. After investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed for the aforesaid offences. The victim is aged 16 years. In her statement recorded under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, she has stated that since the accused pressurized her, she went along with him to Jog falls and stayed at Sriranga

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:22012 CRL.P No. 2184 of 2024

¶35

Home Stay for 5 days and later came back. Apparently, she has not stated anything about the sexual assault committed by the petitioner. However, the medical report discloses that the hymen was not in tact, which prima facie discloses commission of the offence by the petitioner. However, it is noticed that the petitioner is aged 24 years and is not having any criminal antecedents. If he is detained in custody, he may come in contact with hardcore criminals, which may not be in the best interest of the petitioner. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution.

¶36

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the

¶37

affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

The petition is allowed.

¶40

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:22012 CRL.P No. 2184 of 2024

¶41

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in in Crime No.117/2023 of Davanagere Women Police Station, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶42

a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.

¶43

b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶44

c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.

¶45

If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.

¶46

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties

¶47

NC: 2024:KHC:22012 CRL.P No. 2184 of 2024

¶48

¶49

and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.

¶50

Sd/JUDGE

¶51

SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

Sri Mehaboob Khan @ Anu Malik v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Mehaboob Khan @ Anu Malik 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

Mr. Dhanush. v Vs the State by R.T. Nagar Police Station

Mr. Bikash Panda Vs State of Karnataka

Sisu Suren Alis Sisu Vs the State of Karnataka

S Rashmi Vs State of Karnataka

Jagadeesh Vs State by Kundapura Police Station

Shruthi Vs State of Karnataka by