Sri Akabar Baig Vs the State of Karnataka

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, KADUGONDANAHALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY STATE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.637/2025 OF DADUGONDANAHALLI P.S. PENDING ON THE FILE OF LD. XIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU (CCH-22).

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:2904 CRL.P No. 267 of 2026

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Accused in S.C.No.637/2025 pending before the Court of XIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.7/2025 registered by Kadugondanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru for offence punishable under Section 103 of BNS, 2023 is before this Court in this successive bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 seeking regular bail.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶26

FIR in Crime No.7/2025 was registered by

¶27

Kadugondanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru against the petitioner herein, for offence punishable under Section 103 of BNS, 2023, based on the first information dated 09.01.2025 received from Smt.Amreen Begum, mother of deceased Akram Baig.

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:2904 CRL.P No. 267 of 2026

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

During the course of investigation, petitioner was

¶31

arrested on 09.01.2025 and remanded to judicial custody. After completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed against him for the aforesaid offences. His bail application filed before the trial Court was rejected and therefore he had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.9516/2025 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 21.07.2025 with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh bail application after examination of alleged eye-witnesses i.e., CW.1 to CW.4 is completed before the Trial Court. It is under these circumstances, petitioner is before this Court in this successive bail application.

¶32

Petitioner is the elder brother of deceased Akram

¶33

Baig. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that first informant who is the mother of the petitioner and deceased was residing in her house along with her son deceased Akram Baig. Petitioner who is married was residing separately. On 08.01.2025 at about 09.30 p.m., when he had telephoned his mother, he came to know that

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:2904 CRL.P No. 267 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

his brother Akram Baig as usual had consumed alcohol and was fighting with his mother. It is under these circumstances at about 10:30 p.m., petitioner came to the house of his mother and tried to advise his brother Akram Baig. However, Akram Baig did not listen to the petitioner and on the other hand he continued to quarrel with his mother and the petitioner who got enraged, brought a knife from the kitchen and stabbed Akram Baig and as a result, Akram Baig suffered multiple injuries on his head, neck and other parts of the body. Though, Akram Baig was subsequently shifted to the hospital, he died in the hospital while undergoing treatment. It is under these circumstances, based on the first information received from the mother of the petitioner, FIR was registered against him and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.01.2025.

¶37

6. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is

¶38

already filed. CW.1 to CW.4 are the alleged eye-witnesses in the present case. CW.1 to CW.4 have been examined

¶39

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:2904 CRL.P No. 267 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

before the Trial Court as PW.4 to PW.7. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, PW.4 to PW.7 have not supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile witnesses.

¶42

The said submission is not seriously opposed by learned HCGP.

¶43

The panchas to the spot mahazar have been examined as PW.1 and PW.2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that even PW.1 and PW.2 have not supported the case of prosecution. As on this date, totally seven charge sheet witnesses have been examined as PW.1 to PW.7, out of the 32 charge sheet witnesses cited in the present case. Since material charge sheet witnesses have been already examined, there cannot be any apprehension that petitioner may tamper with the material charge sheet witnesses. Petitioner who has no other criminal antecedent is in custody for the last more than one year. He is a married person having family to be taken care of.

¶44

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:2904 CRL.P No. 267 of 2026

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following:-

¶47

ORDER

¶48

The Criminal petition is allowed .

¶49

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.637/2025 pending before the Court of XIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.7/2025 registered by Kadugondanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru for offence punishable under Section 103 of BNS, 2023, subject to the following conditions:

¶50

a) The petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶51

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial

¶52

7 -

¶53

NC: 2026:KHC:2904 CRL.P No. 267 of 2026

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶56

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶57

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶58

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against his is disposed off.

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶61

JUDGE

¶62

KVR

¶63

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Sri Akabar Baig v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Akabar Baig 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

Shri Karthik Velu Vs State of Karnataka

Smt T Sandhya Vs Sri S Rangaswamy

Siddiqa Begum Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Just Stitch Vs Baseer Pasha

Mrs. Shakuntala Vs Mangala Credit Co. Operative Society Limited

Sri Umesh B Vs Sri Ashith Nag