Dismissed

Mr. Syed Shahid v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Jul 2024CRL.P/6231/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the criminal petition seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The Court held that the nature of allegations involving threat and extortion requires the petitioner for custodial interrogation, and his status as a student cannot be a ground for bail.

What did the court decide?

The petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

Mr. Syed Shahid Vs State of Karnataka — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:25823 CRL.P No. 6231 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6231 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. SYED SHAHID S/O. SYED SADIQ AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS R/AT: NO.972, 1^ST STAGE DEVANUR EXTENSION, RAJIVNAGAR, MYSURU - 570 019

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. KARTHIK .C.,

¶11

Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: high court of karnataka

¶12

SRI. NISHANTH A.V., ADVOCATES)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER NARASIMHARAJA POLICE STATION MYSURU, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BENGALURU - 560 001

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI .K., HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL, IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE IN PURSUANCE OF FIR DATED 27.05.2024 IN CR.NO.81/2024 AND THE COMPLIANT DATED 27.05.2024 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NARASIMHARAJA POLICE STATION AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN FOR OFFENCE P/US/ 506, 384 OF IPC PENDING IN THE COURT OF THE 3^RD ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE, (JR.DN.) AND JMFC MYSURU VIDE ANNEUXRE A AND B RESPECTIVELY.

¶18

THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:25823 CRL.P No. 6231 of 2024

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner-accused No.1 is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.81/2024 of Narasimharaja Police Station, pending on the file of the learned III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC., Mysore, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 384 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant - Aryan Pandit.

¶22

Heard Sri.Karthik K., learned counsel for Sri. Nishanth A.V., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Rahul Rai K., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶23

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶24

“Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:25823 CRL.P No. 6231 of 2024

¶26

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

¶27

R E A S O N S

¶28

The petitioner being accused No.1 is seeking grant of anticipatory bail on the apprehension of being arrested. Initially, the informant lodged the first information against two unknown persons making specific allegations that two persons have came on a motor cycle, threatened the informant and extorted Rs.25,000/- by making him to transfer the same through phonepe. It is stated that accused No.2 is already apprehended and his voluntary statement is recorded. The nature of allegations requires the petitioner for identification and for custodial interrogation. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a student cannot be a ground to grant him anticipatory bail, when the nature of the allegation requires him for custodial interrogation. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:25823 CRL.P No. 6231 of 2024

¶30

¶31

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the

¶32

negative and proceed to pass the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The petition is dismissed.

¶35

SD/JUDGE

¶36

BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44

Mr. Syed Shahid v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Syed Shahid v. 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

Malike Saba Vs State of Karnataka

Devaraja P M Vs State of Karnataka

Odesh Raj Urs Vs State of Karnataka

Sathisha B Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Joseph Lawrence Mascarenhas Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Ahmed Sharief Vs State of Karnataka