Dismissed¶41

Abbu Moulana @ Abubakar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Mar 2025CRL.P/200068/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Murder-case bail rejection, Kalaburagi: CRL.P No. 200068 of 2025 (NC: 2025:KHC-K:1601), S. Rachaiah J., 12.03.2025 — petition u/S. 483 BNSS 2023 / S. 439 CrPC by A-5 Abbu Moulana @ Abubakar in SC No. 71/2022 (Crime No. 93/2019, University P.S.) u/Ss. 143, 147, 148, 324, 504, 506, 302, 307 r/w 149 IPC; custody since 06.04.2021; body-warrant arrest via Crime No. 18/2021 (Arms Act); disputed machete recovery; eyewitness depositions supported prosecution overt acts; bail denied; Trial Court directed to complete CW-11 evidence within two months with liberty to renew.

What did the court decide?

Bail refused; petition rejected. Consequential direction: Trial Court to conclude the evidence of CW-11 within two months from receipt of certified copy of the order, failing which the petitioner may renew the bail prayer before this Court. ¶41

Abbu Moulana @ Abubakar Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arrayed as accused No.5 (per additional charge sheet), should be enlarged on bail in connection with Crime No. 93/2019 of University Police Station, Kalaburagi (SC No. 71/2022) for offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 504, 506, 302, 307 r/w 149 IPC. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

On reading the depositions of the material witnesses, which supported the prosecution case including the overt acts attributed to each accused, the Court held that it is not a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner; the petition was rejected.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

The Trial Court was directed to conclude the evidence of CW-11 within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, failing which the petitioner would have liberty to approach the Court again for the same relief.

¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Criminal Petition under S. 483 BNSS, 2023 (S. 439 CrPC) by A-5 (additional charge sheet) in SC No. 71/2022 (Crime No. 93/2019, University P.S., Kalaburagi) for offences u/Ss. 143, 147, 148, 324, 504, 506, 302, 307 r/w 149 IPC — incident of 24.04.2019 in which the petitioner is alleged to have assaulted Fayaz Shaik with a Koita, causing his death — petitioner in judicial custody since 06.04.2021; earlier bail application rejected, Supreme Court declined interference, two coordinate-bench applications withdrawn — depositions of material witnesses on record supported the prosecution case, including the overt acts attributed to each accused — HELD: not a fit case to grant bail; petition rejected; Trial Court directed to conclude the evidence of CW-11 within two months from receipt of certified copy of the order, failing which the petitioner may renew the prayer. (S. Rachaiah, J.)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1601 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200068 OF 2025

¶9

(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

ABBU MOULANA @ ABUBAKAR S/O ABDUL RAHEMAN KHAZI, AGE 36 YEARS, OCC: ELECTRICIAN WORK, R/O. FIRDOSH COLONY, HAGARGA ROAD, KALABURAGI-585103.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI RAJESH DODDAMANI, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH, UNIVERSITY POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, NOW REPRESENTED BY, THE ADDITIONAL STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH-585102.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI

¶18

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶19

(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP)

¶20

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S. 483 OF BNSS,2023 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ A-5 (AS PER ADDL. CHARGE SHEET) ON BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH CRIME NO. 93/2019 OF UNIVERSITY POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI FOR THE OFFENCES U/SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 324, 504, 506, 302, 307, R/W 149 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KALABURAGI IN SC NO. 71/2022.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶23

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1601 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2025

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petitioner herein who is arrayed as accused No.5 has approached this Court seeking bail for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 504, 506, 302 and 307 read with Section 149 of IPC.

¶26

Brief facts of the case :

¶27

It is the case of the prosecution that on 24.04.2019 at about 10.30 p.m., when the complainant and his friend Fayaz Sheikh and others were sitting outside the Peera Bangali Darga, Kalaburagi town, the accused persons went on their motorcycle and car. They put the light on the face of complainant and his friends. When they asked as to why they put the torch lights on their faces, the quarrel took place between them. It is alleged that the petitioner herein had assaulted Fayaz Shaik with Koita on the backside of his head. Consequently, the said Fayaz Shaik fell on the ground and succumbed to the said injuries. The other persons also sustained injuries. Based on the complaint, the jurisdictional police have registered a case. After conducting the investigation, the police have submitted the charge sheet.

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1601 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2025

¶29

It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was arrested in Crime No.18/2021 under the offences provision of the Arms Act, under body warrant and thereafter, he has been produced before the Court on the basis of the body warrant in the present case. After producing him in the case on body warrant, recovery of machete had taken place, which cannot be believable. Moreover, though there are eyewitnesses in this case, the evidence of all the eyewitnesses are completed and only CW-1 needs to be examined, however, the prosecution deliberately avoiding to record the evidence. Therefore, there is a delay in concluding the trial.

¶30

The petitioner is in judicial custody since 06.04.2021, however, other accused persons, who are stated to have threatened the deceased were on bail. The petitioner has been implicated in a false case. There are two cases leveled as against him by the different police.

¶31

The petitioner is a permanent resident of Firdosh Colony, Hagaraga road, Kalaburagi and he will abide by the conditions imposed by this Court in the event of his release on bail.

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1601 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2025

¶33

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent vehemently opposed the said submissions and further submitted that initially, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected and he approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court declined to interfere with the order of this Court. Subsequently, there were two applications filed before the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and those applications were withdrawn.

¶34

It is further submitted that already the material witnesses have been examined and one more witness needs to be examined. Hence, a direction may be given to the Trial Court to conclude the Trial as early as possible. Since severe allegations are made out against the petitioner and if he released on bail, there are chances of absconding from the case. Hence, the bail application has to be rejected.

¶35

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the charge sheet material. The learned counsel for the petitioner has made available the depositions of the material witnesses. On reading of the evidence of those material witnesses, it reveals that the said witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and have

¶36

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1601 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2025

¶37

stated about the overt-acts attributed against each of the accused persons.

¶38

On reading of the evidence of all the material witnesses, I am of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner. It is appropriate to direct the Trial Court to conclude the trial in respect of material witnesses within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶39

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i. Petition stands rejected.

¶42

ii. The Trial Court is directed to conclude the evidence of CW-11 within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which, the liberty will be given to the petitioner to approach this Court again for the

¶43

same relief.

¶44

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶45

TMP/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19 CT:PK

Abbu Moulana @ Abubakar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abbu Moulana @ Abubakar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhimashi and Ors. Vs Muttappa

Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka and Anr.

Mohd. Allabaksha @ Saifaan Vs the State

Muniram Renuka Prasad Vs State of Karnataka

Kamalakar Vs the State of Karnataka

Ashwath Vs the State of Karnataka and Anr.