Allowed

Sheik Imran v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Oct 2024CRL.P/9027/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's bail petition in a murder case, noting that the trial had been pending for over two years, ten witnesses including circumstantial ones had turned hostile, and co-accused No.3 had already been granted bail. Bail was granted subject to stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to executing a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sureties, monthly police station attendance, and non-interference with witnesses.

Sheik Imran Vs State of Karnataka — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:41334 CRL.P No. 9027 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9027 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHEIK IMRAN, S/O SHEIK BABA, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/AT #11, 3^RD CROSS, SHIVAMATT ROAD, NEAR CHITRA BAKARIYA, GOVINDAPURA, BANGALORE – 560 087.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. M. KRISHNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally STATE OF KARNATAKA, signed by STATE BY VARTHUR P.S., KAVYA R RPTD BY Location: STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Karnataka HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI.RANGASWAMY R., HCGP)

¶14

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023, PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER OF BAIL ENLARGING THE PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.86/2022 OF VARTHUR POLICE NOW

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:41334 CRL.P No. 9027 of 2024

¶17

IN S.C.NO.197/2022 AND PENDING TRIAL BEFORE HONBLE 9TH ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE RURAL, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302, 120B R/W 34 OF IPC.

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "the BNSS") for granting regular bail in S.C.No.197/2022, arising out of Crime No.86/2022, registered by Varthur Police Station, pending on the file of the 9^th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 201 and 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

¶21

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

¶22

¶23

NC: 2024:KHC:41334 CRL.P No. 9027 of 2024

¶24

The case of the prosecution is that the complainantBalaji, the uncle of the deceased filed a complaint to the Police on 10.04.2022 alleging that his niece-Sunitha Ramprasad -

¶25

deceased said to be residing with one Satish Ramprasad at Malleshwaram in an Apartment at Flat No.201. Her father was residing at Mysuru, he was aged about more than 83 years. Subsequently, from 31.03.2022 she was missing and not found. Thereafter, they came to know that the dead body was found in the flat at Varthur area in flat No.403 at 4^th Floor in a decomposed condition. After registering the UDR No.13/2022, the Police took up the investigation and arrested accused Nos.1 to 3 and it was revealed that accused No.1 provided a rented house to the deceased and came to know that she is having

¶26

money and in order to rob the said money, accused No.1 colluded with this petitioner and accused No.3 and committed murder of the deceased in the Flat. Thereafter, the accused No.3 was called for disposal of the dead body but was unable to dispose, therefore, they left the dead body in the said flat and fled away. After the arrest, the petitioner was remanded to Judicial Custody along with the other accused. The bail petition of this petitioner came to be rejected by this Court in Criminal

¶27

¶28

NC: 2024:KHC:41334 CRL.P No. 9027 of 2024

¶29

Petition No.448/2023 dated 16.09.2023. Hence, the petitioner is once again before this Court, seeking bail.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶31

now, the trial is under progress and about ten witnesses have been examined. The circumstantial witnesses in respect of recovery and payment of money have turned hostile to the prosecution case. Still, the trial is in progress and it may take much more time for its conclusion. The petitioner(accused No.2) has been in custody for more than two years. However, accused No.3 has already been granted bail. Hence, he sought for grant of bail.

¶32

Having heard the arguments and on perusal of

¶33

the records, which reveals, this Court has already granted bail to accused No.3 in Criminal petition No.7390/2022 dated 02.09.2022 and bail petition of this petitioner came to be rejected in the first instance. The trial has already begun and ten witnesses have been examined, as per the deposition produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Out of them, most of the witnesses have turned

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:41334 CRL.P No. 9027 of 2024

¶35

hostile including the circumstantial witnesses for seizure of money and payment of money and the next hearing date is fixed on 21.10.2024. Still there are another 44 witnesses to be examined. The trial may take much more time. The material witnesses have turned hostile. Keeping the petitioner in custody will not serve any purpose. Therefore, by imposing certain stringent conditions, bail is granted.

¶36

Hence, I pass the following:

¶37

ORDER

¶38

The petition is allowed . The Trial Court is hereby directed to release the petitioner/accused No.2 on bail, in S.C.No.197/2022, arising out of Crime No.86/2022 of Varthur Police Station, pending on the file of the 9^th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, subject to the following conditions:

¶39

(i) The petitioner/accused No.2 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `2,00,000/- (Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court;

¶40

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:41334 CRL.P No. 9027 of 2024

¶41

(ii) He shall appear and mark his attendance in the concerned Police Station once in a month on every second day of English calendar month for a period of one year till completion of the trial, whichever is later;

¶42

(iii) He shall not indulge in similar offences strictly;

¶43

(iv) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly/ indirectly;

¶44

(v) He shall not leave the jurisdiction without prior permission of the Trial Court.

¶45

If any of the conditions is violated, then the prosecution is at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail.

¶46

Sd/(K.NATARAJAN) JUDGE

¶47

BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12

Sheik Imran v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheik Imran 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

C. Jayanna Vs M Suresh

Tirumala Devarapalli Gangadhara @ Gangadhara Vs the State of Karnataka

Madhusudan . v @ Chithali Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjunath R Vs Smt. Roopa Rao B a

Sri v Anil Kumar Vs Sri G Chinnappa Reddy

Ramakrishna Vs Superintendent Engineer