SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Farha Ashriffi vs State Of Karnataka on 25 June, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3526 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

FARHA ASHRIFFI
W/O MAQSOOD KHAN MOHAMMED ZAI
D/O SYED NAZMUDDIM ASRAFFI
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/A NO.L-3, LECTURE QUARTERS
BENGALURU UNIVERSITY
JNANABHARATHI
BENGALURU-560056 … PETITIONER

(BY SRi: KEMPARAJU, ADVOCATE)

AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REP BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE-560001

2. SRI MAQSOOD KHAN MOHAMMED ZAI
S/O SRI KHASIM KHAN MOHAMMED ZAI
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/A NO.177, 11TH MAIN
BIKASIPURA YALECHANAHALLI
BENGALURU-560062 … RESPONDENTS

(SRI: S.VISHWA MURTHY, HCGP FOR R1
SRI: MOHAMMED ARIF KHAN MAKKI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI: MASOOD ALI KHAN MECCI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
2

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE
THE PETITIONER ON BAIL TO CANCEL THE BAIL ORDER DATED
02.05.2018 IN CRL.MISC.NO.3338/2018 PASSED BY THE XLV
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY
(CCH-46) AND ISSUE NBW TO THE ACCUSED/RESPONDENT NO.2.

THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned HCGP

for respondent No.1 – State and learned counsel for respondent

No.2.

2. Petitioner has sought for cancellation of the bail on

the solitary ground that respondent No.2 has violated condition

No.5 in Crl.Misc.No.3338/2018 dated 02.05.2018. The condition

reads as under:

“5. He shall not commit similar offence or
any offence during the pendency of case.”

3. During the hearing, the learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that respondent No.2 has also violated

condition No.3 by issuing threats, directly and indirectly, to the

persons acquainted with the facts of the case.
3

4. According to the petitioner, she had initiated a

criminal action against respondent No.2 under sections 498A and

506 of Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act, 1961. The said case ended in acquittal by order

dated 21.9.2017 in C.C.No.15428/2017. According to the

petitioner, in the said case, the parties arrived at a compromise

and since then, the parties are residing separately. If so, there

was absolutely no occasion for respondent No.2 either to

threaten the victim or other witnesses. Even otherwise, no

specific instances are pleaded in the petition. The petitioner has

not produced any material to show that respondent No.2 is

involved in any similar offence during the pendency of the case

arising out of Crime No.23/2018 of Basavanagudi Police Station.

Hence, no grounds to cancel the bail.

Accordingly, criminal petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Bss

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 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