Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 1307 (KAR)

Sahul Hameed, S/o Shekabba v. State of Karnataka

2010-12-28

K.N.KESHAVANARAYANA

body2010
ORDER K.N. Keshavanarayana, J.— In this petition filed under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure, the Petitioner, who has been arrayed as accused No. 3 in C.C. No. 1840/2010 on the file of the II J.M.F.C., Mangalore, has sought for an order to enlarge him on bail. The Police Inspector, DCIB, Mangalore has filed the charge sheet against the Petitioner and others for offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 120B, 511 R/w 149, IPC 3, 25, 27, 28 of the Indian Arms Act, 1969. 2. According to the case of the prosecution, Sri Venkatesh Prasanna, Police Inspector of D.C.I.B. lodged a complaint before the S.H.O. of Mangalore that he has received a credible information from the Superintendent of Police of Dakshina Kannada that some underworld Mafia persons are trying to murder the industrialists of Mangalore City, as the said industrialists refused to pay haftha to the said underworld Mafia. Accordingly, on 15-2-2010, the Inspector with the help of other officials of D.C.I.B. arrested the accused on the ground that they were trying to murder the two industrialists in the Mangalore City. After the arrest, the police had recovered from the accused persona the Revolvers, live cartridges, mobile phones, camera, currency notes, pistols, motorcycle, car and other materials. 3. After completing the investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed, Soon after the arrest, the present Petitioner was produced before the learned Magistrate and, he was remanded to the Judicial Custody and since then he has been in the judicial custody. According to the prosecution, from the possession of the present Petitioner, a pistol was recovered and the said pistol had been smuggled to India, as it was manufactured in U.K. 4. When the Petitioner approached the learned Sessions Judge seeking grant of bail, the application came to be rejected on the ground that there is prima facie material to indicate that the Petitioner is guilty of the offences alleged against him. 5. The petition is opposed by the Respondent -State interalia on the ground that the Petitioner is one of the members of the gang, which involved in threatening the industrialists of Mangalore City and they were extracting money. Further, they were also trying to commit the murder of the industrialists in Mangalore City, who refused to pay haftha. Therefore, it is submitted that the release of the Petitioner is not in the public interest. 6. Further, they were also trying to commit the murder of the industrialists in Mangalore City, who refused to pay haftha. Therefore, it is submitted that the release of the Petitioner is not in the public interest. 6. The materials available on record at this stage prima facie indicate that the Petitioner along with the other persons, who are members of a gang had hatched a conspiracy to commit murder of industrialists in the Mangalore City, who refused to pay haftha. The materials also prima lack indicate that for the said purpose the Petitioner and other members of the gang bad smuggled firearms. Further, the prima facie evidence indicate that the pistol manufactured in U.K. has been recovered from the possession of the Petitioner. Having regard to the materials available on record at this stage, there is prima facie evidence to indicate that the Petitioner is guilty of the offences alleged against him. 7. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the offences alleged against the Petitioner and also the punishment for the same, I am of the opinion that the release of the Petitioner on bail is not in public interest. Therefore, I find no good grounds to grant bail. Accordingly, this petition is rejected.