Zuber S/O Sayyed Mahamood Khazi Vs the State of Karnataka

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH PSI INDI POLICE STATION, REP BY ITS ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ADVOCATE GENERAL’S OFFICE, HIGH COURT BUILDING, KALABURAGI.

¶16

SRI DHAMU S/O GENU JADHAV, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. INGALAGI TANDA-1, TQ.INDI, DIST.VIJAYPUR.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1500 CRL.A No. 200047 of 2025

¶21

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/SEC. 14-A(2) OF SC/ST (PA) ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28-01-2025 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE/SPECIAL JUDGE, VIJAYAPUR IN CRIMINAL MISC NO.1948/2024 AND ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN INDI POLICE STATION, CRIME NO. 56/2024 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 61(2), 49, 126(2), 103(1)(2), 351(2), 352, 238 R/W SECTION 190 OF BNS 2023 AND SECTION 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, VIJAYAPUR ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO IMPOSE UPON HIM.

¶22

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH)

¶26

This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused No.5

¶27

being aggrieved by the order dated 28.01.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1948/2024 by the learned II Additional District and Sessions and Special Judge, Vijayapur.

¶28

Brief facts of the case are:

¶29

It is the case of the prosecution that a written

¶30

complaint came to be registered by respondent No.2

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1500 CRL.A No. 200047 of 2025

¶32

stating that on 29.11.2023, quarrel had taken place between deceased Sanket, Satish and Dhanaraj. The deceased Sanket had assaulted both Satish and Dhanaraj with knife and caused injuries to them. The matter was settled between them and the complainant had paid compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- to the injured persons. Thereafter, due to the said incident, the accused Nos.1 to 3 were waiting for an opportunity to take revenge against the old quarrel that had taken place between the deceased and themselves.

¶33

It is stated that on 14.09.2024, accused Nos.1 to 3 and another have assaulted the deceased Sanket when he was proceeding on his motorcycle along with CW.16. In the said incident, Sanket had sustained injuries and succumbed to the said injures. A complaint came to be registered by the father of the deceased against accused Nos.1 to 3 and another. The jurisdiction police have registered a case against accused Nos.1 to 3 and another in Crime No.56/2024 for the offences under

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1500 CRL.A No. 200047 of 2025

¶35

Sections 61(2), 49, 126(2), 103(1)(2), 351(2), 352, 238

¶36

read with Section 190 of BNS, 2023 and under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

¶37

During the investigation, the name of this appellant was inserted in the charge sheet on the basis of the voluntary statement of accused No.1.

¶38

Heard learned counsel Sri S.S.Mamadapur for the appellant, learned High Court Government Pleader Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin for respondent No.1 and learned counsel Sri Mahantesh Patil for respondent No.2.

¶39

It is the submission of learned counsel for the

¶40

appellant that the appellant is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Though there are some allegations against the appellant that he had instigated accused Nos.1 and 2 to eliminate the deceased and handed over the knife to commit his murder, there is no proof in that regard.

¶41

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1500 CRL.A No. 200047 of 2025

¶42

It is further submitted that based on the

¶43

voluntary statement of accused No.1, a case has been registered against accused No.1, however, it cannot be sustained as it is contrary to the settled principle of law. Therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions.

¶44

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader though has opposed the submission of learned counsel for the appellant, he has not made out a case to deny the bail to the appellant. Therefore, the submission of learned High Court Government Pleader cannot be sustained.

¶45

Having heard the learned counsel for respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the complaint and charge sheet, it appears from the records that the appellant has been arrayed as accused No.5 in the charge sheet. However, it has been come on record on the basis of the voluntary statement of accused No.1. There is no evidence to show that he instigated the others to eliminate

¶46

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1500 CRL.A No. 200047 of 2025

¶47

the deceased. Hence, it is appropriate to grant him bail without adverting to the merits of the case.

¶48

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

The appeal is allowed.

¶51

The impugned order passed by the learned II

¶52

Additional District and Sessions and Special Judge, Vijayapur in Crl.Misc.No.1948/2024 dated 28.01.2025 is set aside.

¶53

The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.56/2024 of Indi Police Station, Vijayapur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 49, 126(2), 103(1)(2), 351(2), 352, 238 read with Section 190 of BNS, 2023 and under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, subject to the following conditions:

¶54

a) The appellant shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶55