SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ayub And Anr vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 January, 2020








1. Ayub S/o Maheboob Qureshi
Age: 50 years, Occ: Private Service
R/o Noorani Mohalla, Kalaburagi

2. Mansoor S/o Maheboob Qureshi
Age: 26 years, Occ: Chicken Vendor
R/o Noorani Mohalla, Kalaburagi
… Petitioners

(By Sri Syed Mastan, Advocate)


The State of Karnataka
Through Women Police Station,
(Represented by Special Public
Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka
Kalaburagi Bench-585105)
… Respondent

(By Sri Mallikarjun Sahukar, HCGP)

This criminal petition is filed under Sectionsection 439 of
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the accused/petitioners on bail
in Crime No.70/2018 of Women P.S. Kalaburagi in split up
C.C.No.1654/2019 pending on the file of II Addl. Civil
Judge and JMFC Kalaburagi for the offences punishable
under Sectionsections 498A, Section302 read with Sectionsection 149 of IPC.

This petition coming on for orders this day, the court
made the following:


The present petitioners who are accused nos.2

and 5 in split-up C.C.No.1654/2019 pending before

the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Kalaburagi,

have filed this petition seeking their enlargement on

bail under Sectionsection 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure

(hereinafter for brevity referred to as ‘SectionCr.P.C’). The

offences alleged against the present petitioners are

punishable under Sectionsections 498A, Section302 read with Sectionsection

149 of Indian Penal Code.


2. The summary of the case of prosecution is

that the present petitioners joined by accused no.1

Shri Zameer committed the murder of Smt. Fatima

alias Jabeen Fatima in the house of accused no.1 on

the night of 27.08.2018 by hanging her to the ceiling

of the house with the help of a rope.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners

submits that the prosecution has not collected

sufficient material to prove the alleged guilt against

the accused even prima facie. The alleged statements

of the daughters of the deceased is not reliable and

trustworthy since they are two small children and their

statement requires to be considered very cautiously

and with utmost care. He further submits that the

accused no.1 is none else than the husband of the

deceased who has already been enlarged on bail by

this court, as such, on the ground of parity also the

present petitioners deserve to be enlarged on bail.


4. The prosecution, which like in other cases,

also has not filed its objections to the petition in this

matter and through its High Court Government

Pleader submitted that there are two eyewitnesses to

the alleged incident who are none else than the

children of the deceased as such there are no reasons

to disbelieve their version. He further submits that

the accused no.1 was enlarged on bail considering the

fact that the alleged eyewitnesses who are his minor

children, as such, they should have parental care.

5. A perusal of the charge sheet, at this stage

prima face would go to show that the prosecution

mainly relies upon the alleged statement said to have

been given by CW-10 and CW-11 who are two minor

daughters of the deceased. A reading of their alleged

statement before the Investigating Officer at this

stage prima facie go to show that both the children

appears to have stated that their father, who is

accused no.1 herein, joined by the present petitioners

have strangulated their mother on the night of

27.08.2018 in their house. However the fact remains

that the said father of those two children who is none

else than the husband of the deceased has already

been enlarged on bail under Sectionsection 439 Cr.P.C. The

circumstances of the case at this stage would go to

show that the role of the present petitioners is not

grievous or heinous than the role of accused no.1 in

the instant case. As such, the present petitioners

deserve the same treatment as that of accused no.1.

Further, it is not in dispute that the present petitioners

are in judicial custody since few months and their

continuation in the custody is not required in the

matter as the investigation has long back been

completed and charge sheet has been filed. However,

the apprehension of the prosecution of the possibility

of the petitioners absconding from the trial may be

checked by imposing suitable restrictions.

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:


The petition is allowed. The petitioner no.1 –

Ayub S/o Maheboob Qureshi and the petitioner no.2 –

Mansoor S/o Maheboob Qureshi be enlarged on bail in

Crime No.70/2018 of Women Police Station,

Kalaburagi, subject to the following conditions:

(i) That each of the petitioners shall
execute a person bond for a sum of
`1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties
for the likesum to the satisfaction of
the enlarging court.

(ii) The petitioners to give in writing
about the change in their address, if
any, to the Investigating Officer as
and when such change occurs and
obtain acknowledgement in that


(iii) They shall appear before the Court on
all the dates of hearing.

(iv) They shall not hamper or tamper the
prosecution witnesses and documents
in any manner.




Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2022 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation