Allowed

Mr Inamul Hassain Manikar @ Inamul Hussen Manikaran v. the State by

Karnataka HC13 Sept 2024CRL.P/7803/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.5 in Crime No.178/2023 sought anticipatory bail for offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 307, 201, 504, 506 and 34 IPC; as no specific overt-acts or authorship of the grievous injury were attributed to him, anticipatory bail was granted with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted in Crime No.178/2023; bond Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties; appear before IO within 15 days; standard restrictive conditions imposed.

Mr Inamul Hassain Manikar @ Inamul Hussen Manikaran Vs… — Anticipatory Bail | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:37658 CRL.P No. 7803 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 7803 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: high court of karnataka

¶8

MR. INAMUL HASSAIN MANIKAR @ INAMUL HUSSEN MANIKARAN S/O LATE NISAR AHMED AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS AGED MENTIONED AS PER AADHAR CARD RESIDING AT No. 1392 4^TH CROSS, GANDHI NAGAR K G HALLI, ARABIC COLLEGE BENGALURU - 560 045.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI M N UMASHANKAR, ADVOCATE SMT. SHAZIA TABASSUM, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE BY KADUGONDANA HALLI POLICE STATION HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001. GOVERNMENT PROSECUTOR.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SMT. N ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.No.178/2023 REGISTERED U/S.341, 324, 307, 201, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC BY THE KADUGONDANA HALLI POLICE PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:37658 CRL.P No. 7803 of 2024

¶18

BEFORE THE 11tH ACMM COURT, MAYO HALL AT BENGALURU IN THE EVENT OF ARREST OF THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE AND ETC,M

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

The petitioner-accused No.5 is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.178/2023 of Kadugondanahalli Police Station, pending on the file of learned XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 307, 201, 504, 506 and 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant- Sri Nayaz Pasha.

¶23

Heard Sri. M.N.Umashankar, learned counsel for Smt.Shazia Tabassum, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.N.Anitha Girish, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:37658 CRL.P No. 7803 of 2024

¶25

In view of the rival contentions urged by the

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

R E A S O N S

¶30

The petitioner being accused No.5 is seeking

¶31

grant of anticipatory bail on the apprehension of being arrested.

¶32

The injured filed the first information against accused Nos.1 to 3 making specific allegations. During investigation, accused No.3 was apprehended and he is enlarged on bail. It is stated that accused Nos.1 and 2 are still absconding. The investigation is completed and the charge sheet came to be filed arraying the present petitioner as accused No.5. As per the charge sheet,

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:37658 CRL.P No. 7803 of 2024

¶34

specific allegations are against accused Nos.1 to 3. It is alleged that accused Nos.4 to 6 have also cooperated in commission of the offence, but no specific overt-acts are attributed against the present petitioner.

¶35

The wound certificate pertaining to the injured discloses that he had sustained three injuries, out of which, injury No.3 is grievous in nature. However, it is not the contention of the prosecution that the petitioner is the author of injury No.3. Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶36

7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶37

ORDER

¶38

The petition is allowed .

¶39

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.178/2023 of Kadugondanahalli Police Station.

¶40

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:37658 CRL.P No. 7803 of 2024

¶41

The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and on his appearance, the Investigating Officer shall enlarge him on bail subject to the following conditions:-

¶42

a. The petitioner shall furnish 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 Investigating Officer;

¶43

b. The petitioner shall not commit any offences;

¶44

c. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer or the Court as and when required; and

¶45

d. The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses.

¶46

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

¶47

NC: 2024:KHC:37658 CRL.P No. 7803 of 2024

¶48

¶49

furnished by him. On satisfaction of the said documents, they may proceed to accept the sureties within a

¶50

reasonable time.

¶51

Sd/(M G UMA) JUDGE

¶52

GH List No.: 3 Sl No.: 8

Mr Inamul Hassain Manikar @ Inamul Hussen Manikaran v. the State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Inamul Hassain Manikar @ Inamul Hussen Manikaran v. the State by

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

Sri S. Rajendra Vs Sri M. Narasimhalu

Sri Seenappa T C Vs State by

Mahendra. C. Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Waheed Ahamed Vs State by Chandra Layout Police Station

Naveenkumar S Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Guruganesh Chits Private Limited Vs Sri.S.L.Suresh