Case Note & Summary
These criminal petitions were filed under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking cancellation of bail granted to various accused in Crime No.38/2020 registered by Mulki Police Station for offences including murder, attempt to murder, rioting, and criminal conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code. The defacto complainant, Imran, filed petitions against accused Nos. 2, 3, 4, 7, and 10, while the State of Karnataka filed a petition against accused No.9. The prosecution case was that on 05.06.2020, due to enmity between accused No.1 and C.W.2, a conspiracy was hatched to eliminate C.W.2. In furtherance of the conspiracy, accused Nos.2 to 10 intercepted the car of C.W.2 and his companions near HDFC Bank, Mulki, and attacked them with deadly weapons. Accused No.2 assaulted with a knife, accused No.3 with a wooden club, accused No.4 with a soda bottle, and accused No.7 with a concrete stone. When the deceased, Abdul Lathif, intervened, he was chased, made to fall, and fatally assaulted. He died on the spot. The injured persons sustained multiple injuries; C.W.2 had four injuries and C.W.3 had eight injuries. The incident was captured on CCTV. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against ten accused. The Sessions Judges granted bail to the accused in various miscellaneous cases. The defacto complainant and the State contended that the Sessions Judges granted bail without proper reasons, ignoring the heinous nature of the offence, the multiple injuries, the death, and the available CCTV evidence. The bail was granted merely relying on an earlier order of the High Court granting bail to accused No.1, who was not present at the scene and whose bail was challenged before the Supreme Court. The accused opposed the cancellation. The High Court heard arguments on 11.08.2021 and reserved orders, but the final outcome is not provided in the available text.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the bail granted to the accused persons in Crime No.38/2020 for offences under the Indian Penal Code should be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Case Details
2021 LawText (KAR) (08) 15
Criminal Petition No.2557 of 2021 connected with Criminal Petition Nos.763, 2555, 2560, 2564, 2572, and 2580 of 2021
For petitioner: Balakrishna M.R.; For respondents: Sandesh Chouta (senior advocate), S. Sunil Kumar, Mahesh Shetty (HCGP), A.P. Pulakeshi, B.S. Prasad (amicus curiae)
Mr. Imran (for Crl.P.Nos.2557/2021, 2555/2021, 2560/2021, 2564/2021, 2572/2021, 2580/2021) and State of Karnataka (for Crl.P.No.763/2021)
State of Karnataka and Accused Nos.2,3,4,7,9,10 (Mohammed Razim, Abubakkar Siddiq, Mohammed Asseem, Muhammed Wafa, Mayyaddi @ Navaz, Basheer @ Basheer Hussain)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Petitions under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for cancellation of bail granted to accused persons in a murder and conspiracy case.
Remedy Sought
The defacto complainant and the State sought cancellation of bail granted by the Sessions Judges to various accused.
Filing Reason
The bail was granted ignoring the heinous nature of the offence, multiple injuries, death, and available CCTV footage; the Sessions Judge relied on an order granting bail to a co-accused who was not present at the scene.
Previous Decisions
The Sessions Judges granted bail to the accused persons in various Crl.Misc. cases; this Court granted bail to accused No.1 in Crl.P.No.4331/2020 dated 21.09.2020, which is under challenge in SLP (Criminal) No.7400/2021 before the Supreme Court. Accused No.5's bail petition was dismissed as withdrawn in Crl.P.No.7848/2020 dated 18.03.2021.
Issues
Whether the bail granted to the accused persons should be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Submissions/Arguments
The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Sessions Judge granted bail without considering the grievous nature of injuries, the death caused, and the CCTV evidence, and relied on an order granting bail to accused No.1 who was not present at the scene.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned Sessions Judge without giving any proper reason has granted bail to the accused persons only relying upon the order passed by this Court in favour of accused No.1 who was not at all present on the spot at the time of incident.
There are four injuries sustained by CW.2 and eight injuries sustained by CW.3 apart from the death caused to one person.
Procedural History
Crime No.38/2020 registered on 05.06.2020 at Mulki Police Station for offences under IPC. FIR named nine accused, charge-sheet filed against ten accused. Accused persons filed bail petitions before Sessions Court: Accused No.7 in Crl.Misc.590/2020, Accused No.4 in 651/2020, Accused No.3 in 768/2020, Accused No.2 in 52/2021, Accused No.10 in 729/2020. Bail was granted. Defacto complainant filed these petitions under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. for cancellation. State filed against Accused No.9. Accused No.1 granted bail by this Court on 21.09.2020 in Crl.P.4331/2020, which is under SLP before Supreme Court. Accused No.5's bail petition dismissed as withdrawn. Heard on 11.08.2021, orders reserved.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 307, 302, 395, 149, 114, 109, 120B
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 439(2)
