Smt Yasmeen Taj @ Yasmeen vs State Of Karnataka on 7 November, 2017

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.

Criminal Petition No.7465/2017
C/W
Criminal Petition No.7466/2017

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7465/2017

BETWEEN

1. SMT YASMEEN TAJ @ YASMEEN
W/O SHAFI AHAMMED KHAN
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT #4/295, BEEDI COLONY
GALIPURA EXTENTION, CHAMARAJANAGARA TOWN
CHAMARAJANAGARA 571 313.

2. SMT. PARVIN TAJ
W/O MUJAHEED
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT GURUPURA VILLAGE AND POST,
HANAGOODU HOBLI, HUNASUR TALUK,
MYSORE DISTRICT-571 105.

3. SMT. ALMAAS
W/O AASIF AHAMMED
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
R/AT NO.2549/C, 23RD CROSS,
YARKATTE STREET, LASHKAR MOHALLAH,
MYSORE CITY 570 001.
2

4. SMT. SHAHATAAJ
W/O KALEEM KHAN
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/AT NO.278, 1ST STAGE, 6TH CROSS,
KESARE MYSORE CITY 570 007.

… PETITIONERS
(BY SRI MOHAMMED FARUKE, ADVOCATE
FOR SRI M.S.MUKARRAM, ADVOCATE)

AND

STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY TOWN POLICE STATION
CHAMARAJANAGARA.
REPRESENTED BY STATE PP.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE-01.

… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS PRAYING THAT THIS
HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN
CRIME NO.225/2017 OF CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN POLICE
STATION, CHAMARAJANAGAR, WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498(A),302,201 R/W 149 OF IPC.

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7466/2017

BETWEEN

MR JAHEED @ ABDUL ZAHID
S/O ABDUL WAHEED
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
R/AT BEEDI COLONY, NEAR TIPPU MASJID,
3

GALIPURA EXTENTION,
CHAMARAJANAGARA TOWN
CHAMARAJANAGARA 571 313.
… PETITIONER
(BY SRI MOHAMMED FARUKE, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI M S MUKARRAM, ADVOCATE)

AND

STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY TOWN POLICE STATION,
CHAMARAJANAGARA.
REPRESENTED BY STATE PP.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT BANGALORE-01.

… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS
HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN
CRIME NO.225/2017 OF CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN POLICE
STATION, CHAMARAJANAGAR, WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498(A),302,201 R/W 149 OF IPC.

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
4

ORDER

Since these two petitions are in respect of the

same Crime Number and as similar questions of law

and facts are involved in both the petitions, they are

taken up together and disposed of by this common

order in order to avoid repetition of discussion of

facts and law.

2. The first petition i.e., Crl.P.No.7465/2017 is

filed by petitioners accused Nos.7, 8, 9 and 10 and

the connected petition i.e., Crl.P.No.7466/2017 is

filed by accused No.3.

3. Both the petitions are filed under Section 438

of Cr.P.C. seeking direction to the respondent-Police

Station to release the petitioners on bail in the event

of arrest of the petitioners for the alleged offences

punishable under Sections 498A, 302, 201 read with
5

Section 149 of the IPC registered in respondent-

Police Station Crime No.225/2017.

4. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsel

appearing for the petitioners and so also the learned

High Court Government Pleader in respect of both

the petitions.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners made the

submission that the petitioners are residing

separately. They are not at all involved in

committing the alleged offences and even according

to the prosecution case, it is the husband of the

deceased who is accused No.1 gave ill-treatment and

harassment to his wife and he has caused her death.

Hence he submitted that the petitioners who were

residing separately, after hearing the news of death

of the deceased came to the said place. Hence it is

his contention that there is no material to show that
6

they also participated in committing the alleged

offences. Hence he submitted to allow both the

petitions and to grant anticipatory bail.

6. Per contra, the learned High Court

Government Pleader made the submission that the

alleged offence is under Section 302 of IPC apart

from Sections 498A and 201 of IPC. It is also his

contention that the matter is still under investigation

and even the Post mortem report is also awaited.

Hence at this stage, the petitioners are not entitled to

anticipatory bail.

7. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail

petition, FIR, complaint and other materials

produced by the petitioners in both the petitions. As

it is submitted by the learned High Court

Government Pleader that post mortem report
7

regarding cause of death is still awaited,

investigation is still going on and this is a petition

seeking anticipatory bail. In view of these factual

aspects placed on record, without expressing opinion

of the Court on the merits of the petitions, at this

stage, both the petitions are disposed of with liberty

to the petitioners that immediately after completing

the investigation and filing of the final report, they

can approach the concerned Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE

JT/-

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *