Babulal Vs State by

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.24/2016 (SC.NO.181/2021), FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 120(B), 143, 147, 148, 302 AND 149 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, REGISTERED BY BOMMANAHALLI POLICE STATION, NOW THE CASE IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE LXII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-63).

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

Petitioners are before this Court, praying to enlarge them on bail in connection with a case registered in Crime No.24/2016 of Bommanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, now pending in S.C.No.181/2021 on the file of the Court of LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

¶23

Charge sheet is filed against accused Nos.1 to 5 for offences punishable under Section 120B, 143, 147, 148, 302 r/w 149 of IPC. Petitioners were initially granted bail by this Court, but they failed to appear before the trial Court and therefore, the case against them was spilt-up

¶24

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:508 CRL.P No. 13241 of 2024

¶25

from original S.C.No.913/2016. Subsequent to their arrest they are remanded to judicial custody. Their bail petition has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, on the ground that they have violated the conditions of bail and not attended the Court etc.

¶26

The learned counsel appearing for petitioners has contended that due to Covid-19 pandemic, petitioners could not appear before the trial Court and therefore, NBW was issued against them. He contended that nonappearance of the petitioners before the trial Court was unintentional and in case an opportunity is given to them they will attend the trial Court regularly without fail.

¶27

Learned High Court Government Pleader on the other hand has opposed the prayer for bail contending that the petitioners were shown leniency by this Court once by granting bail in a heinous case, imposing conditions., however, they have violated the conditions and remained absent before the trial Court and therefore, the trial Court was constrained to spilt-up the case against them and to

¶28

4 -

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:508 CRL.P No. 13241 of 2024

¶30

proceed against rest of the accused. He contended that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may once again abscond and thereby hamper the trial proceedings.

¶31

It is the case of prosecution that accused No.1 was running a real estate business at Madina Nagar, near Bilal Masjid. Deceased Wazir had joined chits for Rs.30,00,000/- with him, for his daughter’s marriage. After closing the chit, in order to avoid making payment to the deceased, accused No.1 hatched a plan with other accused persons to commit his murder. In furtherance of the same, on 21.03.2016 at 7.00 p.m., when the deceased was proceeding on his two wheeler in front of a timber shop, all the accused attacked him with lethal weapons and committed his murder.

¶32

Initially, FIR was registered against accused No.1 by name Ismail and petitioner No.1 and others. Charge sheet was filed against accused Nos.1 to 5. Petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.2 and 5 in the charge sheet. They were arrested on 22.03.2016.

¶33

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:508 CRL.P No. 13241 of 2024

¶34

Accused No.2 along with accused No.1 preferred Crl.P No.1345/2017 seeking bail and the said petition was allowed and they were enlarged on bail vide order dated 05.04.2017. Similarly accused No.5 was granted bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.6311/2016 vide order dated 23.11.2016.

¶35

While enlarging the petitioners on bail, they were directed to attend the Court on all dates of hearing and also not to leave the jurisdiction of trial Court until conclusion of trial. However, due to their absence before the trial Court, they were to be secured under warrant.

¶36

The petitioners have violated the conditions

¶37

imposed by this Court and therefore, rejection of the bail petition by the learned Sessions Judge cannot be found fault with. However, it is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that in original S.C.No.913/2016 wherein the trial has commenced, so far only 7 witnesses are examined from the year 2016. It is submitted that due to covid-19 pandemic, petitioners could not appear before

¶38

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:508 CRL.P No. 13241 of 2024

¶39

the trial Court and their non appearance was

¶40

unintentional.

¶41

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity can be given to the petitioners, considering that they were earlier granted bail by this Court. It is made clear that, further indulgence shall not be shown to the petitioners and if they violate any of the bail conditions, their bail shall be cancelled. For the foregoing reasons, the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

Petition is allowed.

¶44

Petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 5 in Crime No.24/2016 of Bommanahalli Police Station, pending in S.C.No.181/2021 on the file of the Court of LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, shall be enlarged on bail, subject to following conditions:

¶45