- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12761 OF 2024 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)-) BETWEEN: MR. DAVOOD HAKIM AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O MOHAMMED BHAVA, R/AT RIZWANA MANZIL, DARGA ROAD, KARNAD, MULKI, D K DISTRICT - 574 154. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MULKI POLICE STATION MANGALORE, D K REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. MR. IMRAN AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS S/O ABDUL LATHIFF R/AT JAMIYA MOHALLA 10TH THOKUR, PADUPANAMBOOR VILLAGE MANGALORE CITY, D K DISTRICT - 574 146 (VIDE ORDER DATED 7.4.2024) …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M M., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. M.R.BALAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by NANDINI D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN CONNECTION WITH SC.NO.47/2021 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.38/2020 OF MULKI P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 114, 109, 120B, 341, 307, 302 R/W 149 OF IPC, 1860. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER Accused No.1 in SC.No.47/2021 pending before the Court of VI Addl. District & Sessions Judge, D.K.Mangaluru, arising out of Crime No.38/2020 registered by the Mulki Police Station, Moodabidre, Mangalore City, for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 114, 109, 120B, 341, 307, 302 R/w Section 149 of IPC, is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. FIR in Crime No.38/2020 was registered by the Mulki Police Station, Moodabidre, Mangalore City, initially for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 341, 307, 302, 395 R/w Section 149 of IPC, against the petitioner herein and others, based on the first information dated 05.06.2020 received from Imran S/o deceased Abdul Lathif. During the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested on 09.06.2020. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed and petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.1 in the charge sheet. His bail application filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court was rejected. Therefore, he had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.4331/2020, which was allowed by this Court on 21.09.2020. The said order was questioned by the defacto complainant before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Special Leave Appeal (Crl) No.3425/2021, subsequently numbered as Crl.A.No.79/2022. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 11.01.2022 set aside the order passed by this in Crl.P.No.4331/2020, with liberty to petitioner to move an application for bail before the concerned Sessions Court, in the event trial in the case is not started within a period of six months from the date of order. Subsequently, petitioner had filed Crl.P.No.10049/2023 before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to revive the bail application in the event trial is not commenced immediately. It appears that trial in the case had commenced on 04.01.2024, and after examination of the material charge sheet witnesses, fresh bail application was filed by the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 petitioner before the Trial Court and the same was dismissed vide order dated 21.10.2024. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedents. He was in custody initially for a period of three months and after the Hon’ble Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted by this Court in Crl.P.No.4331/2020, he was arrested on 30.11.2022 and produced before the Trial Court. Ever since then, he is in custody. Material charge sheet witnesses are already examined before the Trial Court. CW.2 to 4 are the alleged eye witnesses in the present case and even the said witnesses have not spoken about the presence of the petitioner at the spot of crime on the alleged date of incident. Only allegation against the petitioner is about conspiring with accused Nos.2 to 10 to commit the murder of deceased Abdul Lathif. Accused Nos. 2 to 10 are in custody. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP and learned counsel appearing for the complainant have opposed the petition and submit that considering the gravity of the offences and also the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 material produced before the Court and the fact that petitioner had conspired with the other accused persons to commit the murder of deceased, the Hon’ble Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner in Crl.P.No.4331/2020. As on this date, 18 charge sheet witnesses are examined and there are other witnesses who are required to be examined and in the event petitioner is enlarged on bail, petitioner may tamper the prosecution witnesses. 6. Learned counsel for the defacto complainant also submits that petitioner had threatened the material charge witnesses, while he was in custody. In this regard a complaint was lodged before the jurisdictional police. Accordingly, he prayed to dismiss the petition. 7. As per the charge sheet allegations, on 05.06.2020, accused Nos.2 to 10 had conspired with the accused No.1, near the food corner at Mulki, owned by the accused No.1 to commit the murder of CW.2, 3 and deceased Abdul Lathif and in furtherance of said conspiracy, accused Nos.2 to 10 had followed CW.2 to 4 on 05.06.2020, when CW.2 to 4 were traveling in a car bearing registration No. MM-06-AB-7677 and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 at about 4.05 P.M. on 05.06.2020, accused No.2 to 10 intercepted the said car and thereafter said accused started assaulting them. At that time, deceased Abdul Lathif also came to the spot and it is alleged that accused No.6 pushed him and all the other accused present at the spot chased Abdul Lathif and assaulted him with deadly weapons and committed his murder. In the charge sheet, allegation of assaulting Abdul Lathif and committing his murder is against accused Nos.2 to 10. Even the allegation of assaulting the other injured witnesses in the present case is also only as against accused Nos.2 to 10 and as per the charge sheet, petitioner was not present at the spot. Only allegation against him is that he had conspired with accused Nos.2 to 10 to commit the murder of CW.2, 3 and deceased Abdul Lathif. 8. CW.13 Hameed is the alleged eye witness, who has spoken about the alleged conspiracy by the accused persons to commit the murder of CW.2, 3 and Abdul Lathif. CW.13 has been examined before the Trial Court as PW.10 and learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that the said witness has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. CW.13 is the only witness who is cited in the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 charge sheet who speaks about the conspiracy of petitioner with the accused Nos.2 to 10 to commit the murder of CW.2, 3 and deceased Abdul Lathif. CW.2 and CW.3 are the injured eye witnesses in the present case, who are examined as PW.3 and 4. CW.4 is also another eye witness to the incident in question and has been examined as PW.7. The aforesaid eye witnesses namely CW.2 to 4 have not spoken about the presence of the petitioner at the spot of the crime. 9. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that the CW.4 has partially turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. Out of the 78 charge sheet witnesses in the present case, till date prosecution has examined only 18 charge sheet witnesses as PW.1 to PW.18. Material charge sheet witnesses who speak about the role of the petitioner in the crime, have been already examined. Therefore, there cannot be any apprehension at this stage that petitioner is likely to tamper with the material charge sheet witnesses. Accused Nos.2 to 10 who are the alleged assailants in the present case are in custody. It is not in dispute that petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 11.01.2022 while canceling the bail granted to the petitioner in Crl.P.No.4331/2020 had reserved the liberty to the petitioner to move an application for bail before the concerned Sessions Court, in the event trial is not commenced within six months from the date of order. Undisputedly, the trial in case had not commenced within the six months from the date of order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that trial in the case had commenced on 04.01.2024. The petitioner who has no criminal antecedents is in custody in the present case from 30.01.2022 onwards. 11. In the case of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra and Another - 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1693 at paragraph No.19, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows: "19. If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime". 12. Since as on this date only 18 charge sheet witnesses have been examined out of 78 charge sheet witnesses, the chances of trial being completed and case being disposed off on merits is very remote. Considering the above said aspects of the matter and the period of incarceration of the petitioner, who has no criminal antecedents, as against whom allegation is that he has conspired with accused Nos.2 to 10 to commit murder of CW.2 and 3 and deceased Abdul Lathif, the prayer made by him for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case. Accordingly, the following; ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in SC.No.47/2021 pending before the Court VI Addl. District & Sessions Judge, D.K.Mangaluru, arising out of Crime No.38/2020 registered by Mulki Police Station, Moodabidre, - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:17699 CRL.P No. 12761 of 2024 Mangalore City,, for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 114, 109, 120B, 341, 307, 302 R/w Section 149 of IPC, subject to the following conditions: a) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; b) 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; c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses; d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future; e) 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. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE SRK/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20/CT:SK