Habeen Hassan Alias Habbi Vs the State of Karnataka

UMMAR SIYAF @ CHIYA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS S/O MOHHAMED SHAREEF R/AT NO.14-139/C (3)D PARLIYA CROSS ROAD ADYADI HOUSE, B MOODA JODUMARGA POST, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANANDA.

¶12

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

(BY SRI T. RADHAKRISHNA SHETTY, ADV.)

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KONAJE POLICE STATION, KONAJE MANGALURU D.K DISTRICT RESPONDENT (REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGLARU - 576 001.

¶16

…PETITIONERS

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)

¶19

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT AN ORDER OF BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:19956 CRL.P No. 5511 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

CR.NO.142/2024 REGISTERED BY KONAJE POLICE STATION, MANGALORE U/S 332, 309(6), 111 BNS, 2023 IN S.C.NO.26/2025 ON THE FILE OF ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURE.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

Accused nos.1 & 2 in S.C.No.26/2025 pending before the Court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangaluru, arising out of Crime No.142/2024 registered by Konaje Police Station, Mangaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 332, 309(6), 111 of BNS, 2023, are before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

¶28

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶29

FIR in Crime No.142/2024 was registered by Konaje Police Station, Mangaluru City, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 309(6), 332 of BNS, 2023 against unknown persons based on the first information dated 06.12.2024 received from Sajina D'Souza W/o Ronald D'Souza.

¶30

During the course of investigation, petitioners herein were arrested on 10.12.2024 and subsequently remanded to judicial

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19956 CRL.P No. 5511 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

custody. After investigation was completed, charge sheet has

¶34

been filed against them for the aforesaid offences. Bail application filed by the petitioners before the Trial Court in S.C.No.26/2025 was rejected in 28.03.2025. Therefore, they are before this Court.

¶35

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that petitioners are persons with criminal antecedents. The allegation against the accused in the present case is that on 06.12.2024 at about 1.15 p.m., when the first informant who is an Anganawadi worker was inside the Anganawadi centre, two persons who barged into the premises of Anganawadi centre, forcibly snatched the gold chain which the first informant was wearing in her neck and escaped from the spot along with the gold chain weighing about 12 grams worth about Rs.60,000/-.

¶36

During the course of investigation, petitioners were arrested on 10.12.2024. After completing the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against them invoking the offences punishable under Section 111 of BNS, 2023, which would prima

¶37

facie go to show that they are habitual offenders who are involved in committing organized crimes. As against accused

¶38

4 -

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC:19956 CRL.P No. 5511 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

no.1, there are 45 criminal cases pending before various courts

¶42

and as against accused no.2, there are about four cases pending in Mangaluru and Udupi Districts.

¶43

The material on record would go to show that petitioners who were arrested in another case, were released on bail on 06.12.2024 and after they were released from judicial custody, on the same day they had committed theft of motor bike and thereafter, had committed the alleged crime in the present case. Therefore, it is apparent that petitioners do not have any respect or regard to the law. In the event, the petitioners are enlarged on bail, chances of they committing similar offences cannot be ruled out. The charge sheeted offences are punishable with imprisonment for life. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioners for grant of regular bail is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.

¶44

Sd /- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶45

KK

Habeen Hassan Alias Habbi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Habeen Hassan Alias Habbi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narendra R Vs State of Karnataka

Ravi S M Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Hakiulla Vs the State of Karnataka

Jai Kumar @ Jaikumar Vs State by Indiranagar P S

Sri Sabeer Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Syed Ansar @ Ansar Vs the State of Karnataka