Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 981 (KAR)

Sayed Vajeed v. State of Karnataka

2023-08-16

S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

body2023
JUDGMENT 1. Accused in S.C.No.220/2023 pending before the LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru arising out of Crime No.326/2022 registered by Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru for offence punishable under Sec. 302 of IPC is before this Court under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. On the complaint of one Chand Pasha dtd. 30/10/2022, FIR was registered in Crime No.326/2022 by the Konanakunte Police, Bengaluru against the petitioner herein for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of IPC. In the complaint it is alleged that complainant is married to Smt.Fathima and from the said wedlock they have four children. Deceased Shaffir is the second son of the complainant. On the date of incident, complainant had gone to Kanakapura and on the way back to his house, he was informed by one Shabbir that his son Shaffir was assaulted and stabbed with a knife and he was taken to the hospital. Immediately, complainant rushed to the hospital. At about 9:35 p.m., he was informed by the Doctor that his son had succumbed to the injury. He was subsequently informed by Shafayath that the petitioner had stabbed the deceased with a dragger knife. Accordingly, he had lodged the complaint which had resulted in the registration of FIR in Crime No.326/2022 against the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested during the course of investigation on 30/10/2022. His bail application filed before the LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Court in Crl.Misc.No.2629/2023 was dismissed on 13/4/2023. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences. He submits that the deceased was the aggressor and even if it is presumed that the petitioner had assaulted the deceased, it could be considered as an act in self defence. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30/10/2022. Investigation in the case is completed and the charge sheet has been filed and prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the bail application. She submits that there are four eyewitnesses to the incident and the cause for death is the stab injury caused by the petitioner. She submits that the petitioner had a motive to murder the deceased and accordingly, prays to dismiss the petition. 6. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the bail application. She submits that there are four eyewitnesses to the incident and the cause for death is the stab injury caused by the petitioner. She submits that the petitioner had a motive to murder the deceased and accordingly, prays to dismiss the petition. 6. In the complaint lodged by the father of the deceased dtd. 30/10/2022, he had named the petitioner as the accused on the basis of the information given to him by the one Shafayath, who is his sister's son. It is under the said circumstances, the petitioner was arrested on 30/10/2022. Investigation in the case is completed and the charge sheet has been filed. As per the charge sheet allegations, petitioner and the deceased had quarreled against each other earlier and on 30/10/2022 at about 7:30 p.m., when the petitioner was walking on the road side, the deceased had restrained him and abused him. The deceased allegedly tried to pickup a stone which was lying on the side of the road with an intention to assault the petitioner. It is at that stage, the petitioner allegedly stabbed the deceased with a knife which he was carrying in his pocket. Therefore, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner there could have been a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that the deceased is likely to assault him and sensing danger if he has acted in furtherance of his right of self defence, the question that would arise would be whether the offence would come under Sec. 302 of IPC. Investigation in the case is completed and the charge sheet has been filed. The petitioner is in custody since 30/10/2022. The petitioner is aged about 21 years. Under the circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the following: ORDER Criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner-accused is directed to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.220/2023 on the file of the LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru arising out of Crime No.326/2022 of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru, registered for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of IPC, subject to the following conditions: 1. Accordingly, the following: ORDER Criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner-accused is directed to be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.220/2023 on the file of the LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru arising out of Crime No.326/2022 of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru, registered for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of IPC, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1, 00, 000.00 (One Lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; 2. The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons; 3. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses; 4. The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future; 5. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.