Syed Junaid Vs State by Pension Mohalla

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.234/2025 PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE HASSAN WHICH IS REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE I.E PENSION MOHALLA P.S. HASSAN IN CR.NO.123/2025 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 238, 70 READ WITH SECTION 3(5) OF BNS 2023 AND SEC.67(A) OF I.T ACT 2008.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The petitioner/accused No.4 is before this Court seeking regular bail in Crime No.123/2025 filed by the respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 238, 70 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67(A) of Information Technology Act, 2008, pending in SC No.234/2025 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

¶28

Hassan.

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:21879 CRL.P No. 4001 of 2026

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

The case of the prosecution is that the victim is a mentally challenged woman. On 08.08.2025 at about 8:03 p.m., the complainant received a WhatsApp message from his friend Shahid on his mobile phone. When the complainant opened the said video, he found a scene depicting sexual assault. Upon close observation, he recognized the victim as his mentally challenged younger sister, and it is alleged that accused No.1 was sexually assaulting her, while accused No.2 was moving around at the spot. When the complainant enquired with his friend Shahid about the source of the said video, Shahid informed him that one Umraj of Ilahi Town, arrayed as accused No.3, had sent the same from his mobile number. Hence, he lodged a complaint before the respondent/police. The respondent/police registered a case and conducted investigation and submitted charge sheet.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

¶33

that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences. It is

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:21879 CRL.P No. 4001 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

contended that the allegations in the complaint as well as in the medical history are made only against accused Nos.1 to 3, and that the present petitioner has been implicated solely on the basis of the statement of the co-accused. It is further submitted that the petitioner is about 30 years of age and a permanent resident of Srikanta Nagara, Hassan Town. He will abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court in the event of his release. Making such submission, he prays to allow the petition.

¶37

Per contra, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State vehemently submitted that the petitioner, along with the other accused, committed gang rape on a mentally challenged woman. Though it is submitted that he was not aware of the alleged act, the incident was video recorded and subsequently circulated among friends by accused No.3. It is further submitted that the petitioner has committed a heinous offence in the nature of gang rape. Therefore, it

¶38

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:21879 CRL.P No. 4001 of 2026

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submission, she prayed to reject the petition.

¶41

Heard the learned counsel for the respective

¶42

parties and perused the averments of the charge sheet. It appears from the record that the petitioner and others are alleged to have committed gang rape on a mentally challenged woman, who is the younger sister of the complainant. On perusal of the medical records, three names are mentioned therein and even in the complaint, only three persons names were disclosed. However, the present petitioner appears to be implicated on the basis of the statement of the co-accused. Considering the same, it is appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner by imposing suitable conditions. However, it is made clear that this order shall not be treated as a precedent while considering the bail applications of the other accused.

¶43

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶44

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:21879 CRL.P No. 4001 of 2026

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

ORDER

¶47

i) The petition is allowed.

¶48

ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.123/2025 filed by the respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 238, 70 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67(A) of Information Technology Act, 2008, pending in SC No.234/2025 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Hassan on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶49

iii) The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.

¶50

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail .

¶51

v) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activities till disposal of the case.

¶52

vi) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the jurisdictional police station on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 02.00 p.m.

¶53

7 -

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:21879 CRL.P No. 4001 of 2026

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

In case, the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of

¶57

bail.

¶58

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶59

BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Syed Junaid v. State by Pension Mohalla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Junaid v. State by Pension Mohalla

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

Sri Gangaraja N G Vs the State of Karnataka

Thammegowda Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Anitha B.N, Vs State of Karnataka

Ajaykumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Govindaraju @ Govindha Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Kumar.M., Vs State of Karnataka by