1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.995/2018
BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Afzal Pasha
S/o Bhadoor Shariff
Aged about 37 years.
2. Sri. Afshad Ahamed
S/o. Late Shabir Pasha,
Aged about 40 years.
Petitioner No. 1 and 2
Are R/at No.291, Medimallasandra,
Hoskote Taluk,
Bengaluru Rural District – 562 114.
3. Ashiya Banu @ S. Asiya
W/o Wazid
Aged about 30 years.
R/at No.170, 1st Floor,
3rd Cross,
Gandhipura Nagar,
Whitefield,
Bengaluru – 560 066.
4. Smt. Farhana Khanum
W/o Afzal Pasha
Aged about 24 yars.
5. Smt. Shamshad Unnisa
W/o. Bahaddur Shariff,
Aged about 68 years.
2
Petitioner NO.4 and 5
Are R/at No.170, 1st Floor,
3rd Cross,
Gandhipura Nagar,
Whitefield,
Bengaluru – 560 066.
6. Smt. Farhna Khanam
W/o Afshad Ahamed
Aged about 28 years,
R/at No.291, Medimallasandra
Hoskote Taluk,
Bengaluru Rural District – 562 114.
7. Sri. Bahaddur Shariff
S/o Late Sharif Sab,
Aged about 72 years,
R/at No.170, 3rd Cross,
Gandhipura Nagar,
Whitefield,
Bengaluru – 560 066.
8. Sri. Amjad Pasha
S/o Bahaddur Shariff
Aged about 32 years,
R/at No.170, 3rd Cross,
Gandhipura Nagar,
Whitefield,
Bengaluru – 560 066.
…Petitioners
(By Sri. C.R. Raghavendra Reddy, Advocate)
AND:
State by Whitefield
Police Station,
Rep. by SPP High Court,
Bengaluru – 01.
….Respondent
(By Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP)
3
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event
of their arrest in Crime No.17/2018 of Whitefield Police
Station, Bengaluru for the offence p/u/s 506, 504, 376 and
498(A) r/w 34 of IPC.
This criminal petition coming on for Orders, this day,
the Court made the following:-
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused
Nos.1 and 3 to 9 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking
anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent-police to
release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest
for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 504,
376 and 498A of IPC registered in respondent police
station Crime No.17/2018.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel
appearing for petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 to 9, and
also the learned High Court Government Pleader
appearing for respondent-State.
4
3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produced in
the case.
4. The complainant filed the first compliant on
20.09.2017 in Crime No.347/2017. It is the submission
made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
that in respect of the first complaint, complaint is filed
only against petitioner/accused No.1 herein. He moved
the bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., before
the learned Sessions Judge and he has been granted bail
in Crl. Misc. No.1548/2017. A copy of the same is
produced.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners herein that subsequently,
after a lapse of 3 months and 25 days, the complainant
again filed another complaint in respect of the very
incident making allegations that the other petitioners
also are involved in committing the alleged offences. In
5
the second complaint, there is no allegation regarding
the alleged rape said to have been committed. Hence, it
is the contention of the petitioners herein that
subsequent complaint is filed with a malafide intention
to involve the family members of the petitioner/accused
No.1 in the said case. It is also his contention that when
one Court has considered the bail petition under Section
439 of Cr.P.C. for the alleged offence under Section 376
of IPC and granted regular bail, subsequently,
complainant filed another compliant making false
allegations against other members of the family, which
does not arise at all.
6. But learned HCGP opposed the petition
contending that the material goes to show that there was
a video recording said to have been done by the other
accused persons and as the names of those accused
were left out in the first compliant, therefore, second
complaint was filed by the complainant. Hence, learned
HCGP submitted that there is a prima-facie case even
6
against the petitioners herein who have been included in
the case, subsequently, as per the second compliant. He
therefore opposes the petition on the ground that the
alleged offences are serious in nature.
7. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produced
before the Court with regard to the earlier complaint, bail
order of the learned Sessions Judge, so also the bail
order rejecting anticipatory bail application by the
learned Sessions Judge.
8. It is seen the bail application by accused
No.1, on the basis of the first complaint, has already
been considered by the Court and he has been granted
bail by the order of the Court. Therefore, at this stage, it
cannot be said that the petitioners are not entitled for
anticipatory bail. They have contended in the bail
petition that only to cover the laches in the first
compliant, second complaint came to be filed in respect
7
of the very incident. Learned counsel for the petitioner is
justified in making such submission, in view of the
materials placed on record. It is also contended that
they are innocent, not involved in committing the alleged
offences and are ready to abide by any conditions that
may be imposed on them by this Court.
9. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The
respondent-Police is directed to enlarge the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 to 9 on bail in the
event of their arrest for the alleged offences punishable
under Sections 506, 504, 376 and 498A of IPC registered
in respondent police station Crime No. 17/2018, subject
to the following conditions:
i. Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 to 9
shall execute a personal bond for a sum
of Rs.50,000/- each and shall furnish
one surety each for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 to 9
shall not tamper with any of the
prosecution witnesses, directly or
indirectly.
8
iii. Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 to 9
shall make themselves available before
the Investigating Officer for
interrogation, as and when called for
and to co-operate with the further
investigation.
iv. Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 to 9
shall appear before the concerned Court
within 30 days from the date of this
order and to execute personal bond and
surety bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VBS