- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18366 CRL.P No. 4381 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4381 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS) BETWEEN: SALEEM @ YASEEN ARAFATH S/O. MOHAMMAD SHAFIULLA, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/AT MANJUNATHA BADAVANE, MASIDI GALLI, SHIVAMOGGA TOWN, SHIVAMOGGA - 577205 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHIKKAMAGALURU TOWN POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.WAHEEDA.M.M., HCGP FOR RESPONDENT) THIS CRL.P FILED UNDER SECRTION 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO RELEASE HIM ON BAIL IN CR.NO.58/2021 (S.C.NO.119/2021) OF CHIKKAMAGALURU POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504, 143, 144, 146, 147, 120(b), 114, 323, 324, 302, 149 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHIKKAMAGALURU. Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18366 CRL.P No. 4381 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the accused No.1 seeking for regular bail in Crime No.58/2021, registered by the Chikkamagaluru Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 143, 144, 146, 147, 120(b), 114, 323, 324, 302, 149 of IPC. Factual matrix of the case: 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 08.04.2021, the aunt of the complainant, namely, Sundari was residing in 60 ft., road of Chikkamagaluru. She had two children. Elder son Manoj and one daughter, namely, Kusuma are residing along with her. The said Manoj was studying ITI and also working in a private company at Bengaluru. He had come to the Chikkamagaluru on leave about two months back. However, he had not returned to his work. It is further stated that, on 07.04.2021 at about 9.30 p.m. the complainant had received an information - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18366 CRL.P No. 4381 of 2025 that the said Manoj had been assaulted by unknown persons at Ayyappanagara. On receiving the said information, the complainant went to the spot and took the injured to the hospital for treatment. 3. The facts of the case has been unfolded in such a way that, one Fareedh used to send message to one Hafeeza, who is the younger sister of one Afnan. In this regard, in order to give warning to the said Fareedh, the Afnan had taken one Manoj and Razak along with him and went to Ayyappanagar. When the said Fareedh, Saleem, Thoufiq and Thouseef were standing opposite to the clinic at Ayyappanagar, the said Afnan, Manoj and Razak had questioned one Fareedh for sending messages to the sister of Afnan, and asked the said Fareedh to stop messaging to his sister. 4. In the said scuffle, Saleem took a knife which was kept in motor cycle and assaulted one Razak. Due to which, he had sustained injury to his leg. In the mean time, Manoj had intervened to rescue the said Razak, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18366 CRL.P No. 4381 of 2025 however, he had also received injuries on his head by the Saleem. Due to which, he sustained grievous injury and fell down. Therefore, a complaint came to be registered against all the persons. However, the present petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1. 5. Heard Sri.Lethif.B., learned counsel for the petitioner, and Smt.Waheeda.M.M., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State. 6. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the investigation of the case had been over, the charge sheet has been submitted. The said Saleem had approached this Court by filing Crl.P.No.10033/2021. However, the same has been rejected by this court on the ground that there are eye witnesses to the incident. 7. It is further submitted that, however, the evidence of so called eyewitnesses are not yet secured in spite of issuance of summons as well as warrant. The Co- ordinate Bench of this Court granted bail to one of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18366 CRL.P No. 4381 of 2025 accused on the ground that there is a delay in conducting the examination of eye witnesses. Therefore, the same benefit may also be given to the petitioner and he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 8. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently opposed the said submissions and she further submitted that the bail petition of the petitioner has to be rejected for the reason that he is the person who assaulted with rod on the head of the deceased Manoj, consequently, the said Manoj died. There are eye witnesses to the incident. Merely, because there is a delay in examining the eye witnesses, that may not be sufficient ground to grant bail, when the petitioner is involved in heinous offences. Therefore, the learned High Court Government Pleader prays to reject bail petition. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the facts and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18366 CRL.P No. 4381 of 2025 circumstances of the case. No doubt, primarily it is alleged that the petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.1 had assaulted the deceased Manoj with iron rod on his head and caused injuries. Thereafter, the petitioner had escaped from the spot. 10. Be that as it may, earlier round of considering the bail petition, this Court opined that the evidence of CWs.12, 16 to 20 has to be completed, till then, the bail to the petitioner has to be rejected. However, another Co- ordinate Bench granted bail to the other accused on the ground that there is a delay in conducting the examination of the witnesses. 11. Nevertheless, the petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.1 even though had assaulted the deceased, prima facie, it appears that intention was not there to commit murder of the deceased. This may be one of the grounds to grant bail in addition to the delay in conducting the examination of the witnesses. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:18366 CRL.P No. 4381 of 2025 12. The observation made in this petition is restricted only for the purpose of granting bail. The Trial Court may not be influenced for the observation made by this Court at the time of considering the evidence for disposal. 13. In the light of the observation made above, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.58/2025 of the respondent – Police, pending on the file of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Chikkamagaluru, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation as and when it is required till filing of the charge sheet. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:18366 CRL.P No. 4381 of 2025 b) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail. c) The petitioner shall not threaten nor tamper the prosecution witnesses. d) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Trial Court forthwith. In case, if the petitioner violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE SRK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26