Karnataka High Court Masood Ahamed (In Jail) vs State By Tilak Park P.S on 26 December, 2012Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012 BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.KESHAVANARAYANA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7263/2012
MASOOD AHAMED (IN JAIL)
S/O SHEIK AHAMED
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
OPP: VEERABHADRASWAMY TEMPLE
(BY MISS. A MANJULA, ADV.,)
STATE BY TILAK PARK P.S.
(BY SRI. RAJESH RAI K, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.156/2012 OF TILAK PARK POLICE STATION, TUMKUR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323, 324, 307 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF D.P.ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING FOR ORDERS ON THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER
Petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.1 in Crime No.156/2012 of Tilak Park Police Station Tumkur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 324, 307 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. According to the case of the prosecution, the aforesaid case came to be registered on the basis of the complaint statement of Smt. Mouseena Banu, wife of this petitioner which was recorded in the District Hospital, Tumkur at 22.00 hours on 12.09.2012. According to the allegation made in the said complaint, there used to be quarrel between this petitioner and the complainant in relation to the domestic issues and at about 9.30 p.m. on 11.09.2012, the petitioner assaulted the complainant by hands and kicked her and at that 3
time, she called her brother Dada Peer over phone and when the said Dada Peer came near the house this petitioner assaulted the said Dadapeer with a knife on his neck and thereby attempted to kill him.
3. During the course of investigation, this petitioner was apprehended on 17.09.2012. It appears that, in the meanwhile, apprehending his arrest the petitioner along with his parents had presented petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Court of Tumkur in Crl.Misc.No.912/2012. Though this petitioner had been arrested on 17.09.2012 and later remanded to the judicial custody, the said fact appears to have not been disclosed to the Sessions Court. On 26.09.2012, the said petition came to be allowed granting relief of anticipatory bail to all the three accused persons. However, subsequently, the petitioner filed another petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crl.Misc.No.967/2012 seeking relief of bail. The said 4
petition came to be rejected. Therefore, he is before this Court.
4. The petition is opposed by the respondent- State.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State. Perused the records made available.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, at 9.45 p.m. on 11.09.2012 this petitioner was attacked and assaulted by the said Dada Peer after he was summoned by his sister and as a result of the said assault, this petitioner sustained severe head injury and he was brought to the District Hospital, Tumkur where his statement was recorded by the SHO, Tilak Park Police Station at about 12.00 in the midnight and based on the said report, the case in Crime No.157/2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 323, 324 of 5
IPC came to be registered and as a counter blast, the present case appears to have been registered, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Perusal of the copies of the papers produced would primafacie indicate that this petitioner was brought to the District Hospital, Tumkur at about 11.00 p.m on 11.09.2012 and thereafter his statement was recorded around 12.00 in the midnight. It is, thereafter the statement of the complainant Smt.Mouseena Banu appears to have been recorded after 00-40 hours on 12.09.2012. The copy of the remand application dated 17.09.2012 would also indicate that the petitioner was arrested on 17.09.2012 after being discharged from the Hospital. This would primafacie indicate that the petitioner also had sustained some injuries. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the materials available on record, at this stage, I am of the considered view that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the acts alleged was committed 6
with an intention to murder, attracting the ingredients of Section 307 of IPC. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
8. Hence, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.156/2012 of Tilak Park Police Station, Tumkur, on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate and subject to following conditions:- i) Petitioner shall not tamper or terrorize the prosecution witnesses in any manner; ii) Petitioner shall not indulge in any acts similar to one alleged against him; iii) Petitioner, for the purpose of investigation, shall appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called upon to do so and co- operate in the investigation of the case; 7
iv) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court of Sessions without express permission of the Court concerned. SD/-