Disposed

Mohammad Arif v. National Investigation Agency

Karnataka HC7 Jul 2026CRL.A/22/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal preferred under Section 21 of NIA Act challenging dismissal of bail application. Court disposed of the appeal expressing no view on merits, ordered fresh bail application citing new evidence and raised trial delay.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Appeal dismissed; leave granted to file fresh bail application before trial court; all contentions kept open.

Mohammad Arif Vs National Investigation Agency — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:34035-DB CRL.A No. 22 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 22 OF 2026 (21(NIA))

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MOHAMMAD ARIF S/O MOHD. MUBARAK HUSSAIN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, NO.4/2381, STREET NO.1. IQRA COLONY, ALIGARH, UTTAR PRADESH - 202001.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. SIDDIQ HUSSAIN KHAN, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY BRANCH OFFICE, 3^RD FLOOR, BSNL TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, HAL 2^ND STAGE, INDRA NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560008

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. RAHUL KRISHNA REDDY P., ADV. FOR SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR P., SPL. PP FOR RESPONDENT.)

¶15

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 21 NIA BY THE PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 21.08.2025 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT IN SPL.C.C.NO.22740/2023 FOR FIR BEARING RC.4/2023/ NIA/DLI TITLED IN THE COURT OF THE XLIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AS NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY VERSUS MOHD ARIF AND ETC.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:34035-DB CRL.A No. 22 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

¶23

The appellant, being aggrieved by the order dated

¶24

21^st August, 2025 passed by the Court of XLXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Court for the trial of NIA Cases) at Bengaluru in SC No.2274 of 2023, thereby dismissing his application filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, has preferred this appeal under Section 21(4) of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008.

¶25

Appellant is seeking to set aside the impugned order and to grant him bail in FIR bearing RC-04/2023/ NIA/DLI registered by the respondent-National Investigation Agency.

¶26

One of the grounds urged in the appeal is that the appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 12^th February, 2023, which is nearly three and a half years and

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:34035-DB CRL.A No. 22 of 2026

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

the trial is at a preliminary stage and is not likely to conclude in the near future. The learned Counsel would also contend that in the evidence of one of the witnesses by name Naveen Kumar, examined as PW3 before the trial

¶30

Court, certain material favourable to the appellant has emerged which would prove his innocence and therefore the further incarceration of the appellant would serve no useful purpose and is not warranted.

¶31

Learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for

¶32

the respondent-NIA has filed a detailed statement of objection contending that the charges are already framed

¶33

in this case holding that there are sufficient material against the appellant to proceed against him and the appeal preferred against the said order is also dismissed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.1073 of 2025 dated 09^th December, 2025. The Spl.PP has also disputed the date of arrest contending that the appellant was taken under body warrant in this case on 26^th April 2023 and not on 12^th February, 2023.

¶34

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:34035-DB CRL.A No. 22 of 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

In light of the submission of the learned counsel

¶38

for the appellant that in the evidence of the witness by name Naveen Kumar, examined as PW3 certain material in favour of the appellant has emerged proving his innocence, and that being a subsequent event, this Court is of the considered opinion that the appellant can be given an opportunity to file a fresh application for bail before the trial Court raising all contentions, including the ground of delay in trial.

¶39

Criminal appeal is disposed of . This Court has

¶40

not expressed any view on the merits of the case.

¶41

All the contentions of the parties are kept open.

¶42

IA.III of 2026 is disposed of.

¶43

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶44

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶45

lnn/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16

Mohammad Arif v. National Investigation Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Arif v. National Investigation Agency

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

Anitha Yadav Vs State of Karnataka by Amruthahally P S

Sri. Shivakumar B R Vs State of Karnataka

Sooraj Vs the State of Karnataka

T. Naveena Vs State by Kirugavalu Police

State of Karnataka Vs Ashrith @ Ashu

Ashrith @ Ashu Vs State of Karnataka by