- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103280 OF 2024 (438(Cr.PC)/482(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SADDAM HUSSAIN @ SADDAM, S/O MOHAMMED FAROOQ LIMBUWLE, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: MECHANIC, R/O NEAR VAISHNO DEVI TEMPLE, ISHWAR NAGAR, APMC, HUBBALLI-580025. …PETITIONER (BY SRI R.M. JAVED, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH APMC NAVANAGAR P.S, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C., (482 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH APMC NAVNAGAR P.S. CRIME NO.43/2024 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 332, 353, 307 OF IPC PENDING BEFORE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HUBBALLI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Date: 2025.01.24 11:29:20 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 17.01.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER, THIS DAY THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING: CAV ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI) This petition under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’ for short) is by accused (petitioner) for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime no.43/2024 of APMC Navanagar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 307, 332, 353 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short). 2. Sri R.M. Javeed, learned counsel for petitioner submitted petitioner was a young boy aged 19 years, law abiding citizen, with aged parents and permanent resident of Navanagar, Hubballi. Though he had not committed any offences, he was falsely implicated in Crime no.42/2024 by APMC Navanagar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 376, 504 and 506 of IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO’ for short) and Sections 3 (2) (v), 3 (1) (r), (s) of Scheduled Caste and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘PoA Act’ for short). 3. It was submitted, petitioner was apprehending arrest in Crime no.43/2024 mentioned above, wherein he was being falsely implicated. It was submitted, even as per complaint filed by Police Inspector - Sangamesh Didaginal, Inspector, Vidyagiri Police Station, while on duty at 9:00 p.m. on 03.05.2024, he was instructed by Sri Shivaprakash R. Naik, ACP, Hubballi Sub-Division, Hubballi to bring petitioner involved in Crime no.42/2024 to Navanagar Police Station. When he was about to comply, he was instructed to wait for further instructions, as a crowd had gathered at Navanagar Police Station. At about, 00:20 hours, he received instruction to bring petitioner, and was instructed to board Police vehicle, petitioner took out Craft Knife from his pocket and assaulted police constable – Ravi R. Hosmani, complainant and others in attempt to murder them and escape. Therefore, in self-defence, complainant took out his revolver and shot at petitioner below knee. As complainant, Ravi R. Hosmani, Police Constable and petitioner were injured, they were taken to District Government Hospital, Dharwad for treatment. Based on said complaint - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 Crime no.43/2024 was registered against petitioner. It was submitted, falsity of allegations therein were noticeable as injuries allegedly sustained by complainant/Ravi R. Hosmani, Police Constable were noted as ‘simple’ in their wound certificates. On other hand, attempt to cause harm to petitioner to satiate public sentiment was evident. 4. It was submitted, petitioner was in custody from 04.05.2024, but enlarged on bail in Crime no.42/2024 (Spl.SC.no.45/2024) on 14.08.2024. In meanwhile, prosecution had completed investigation even in Crime no.43/2024 by obtaining custody of petitioner under body warrant and charge- sheet was filed on 05.09.2024, hence petitioner was not required for further custodial interrogation. 5. However, there was real likelihood of petitioner being arrested, even though petitioner was innocent of crimes alleged against him. Further, he was awaiting commencement of trial and its conclusion would take time as prosecution had cited not less than 20 witnesses. Under such circumstances, petitioner prayed for grant of anticipatory bail on any conditions, which were undertaken to be complied with. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 6. Sri Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for respondent – State however, opposed petition. It was submitted petitioner was alleged to have committed heinous offence of attempt to murder. Complaint averments contained specific overt-acts constituting offences alleged. Medical examination report of complainant who was a public servant while discharging duty, showed multiple injuries. And fact that petitioner had used Craft Knife for assaulting complainant indicated gravity of offence. Further, present offence was committed, when petitioner was sought to be taken to Police Station in relation to earlier Crime no.42/2024. It was further submitted, in case grant of anticipatory bail, petitioner would flee from justice or may tamper witnesses and may also commit similar offences. On above grounds sought for rejection. 7. Heard learned counsel and perused material on record. 8. From above, point that arises for consideration is: “Whether petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail with conditions?” - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 9. From above and in view of registration of Crime no.43/2024 of APMC Navanagar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 307, 332, 353 of IPC, implicating petitioner, apprehension of his arrest for non-bailable offences stands substantiated. 10. There is no dispute that petitioner is arraigned in Crime no.42/2024 for various severe offences as stated above and in process of his apprehension for same, he is alleged to have committed present offences detailed in Crime no.43/2024. Though offences alleged are severe/grave, they are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. As per prosecution, petitioner is alleged to have attempted to murder Police who were in process of taking him to Police Station, with Craft Knife which was hidden in his pocket. Prima facie, examination of contents of complaint would contain specific overt-acts and commission of offences in presence of eyewitnesses. But, even as per complainant, petitioner was initially apprehended by two police constables, prior to complainant being instructed at 9:00 p.m., to bring him to police station and after complainant reached spot, he was asked to await further instructions, which came at 00:20 hours. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 And that petitioner assaulted them, only when he was asked to board police vehicle, which prima facie does not appear normal. Moreover, wound certificates describe nature of injuries sustained by complainant and Police Constable as ‘simple’. 11. Though whether petitioner has committed offences as alleged would be matter for trial, fact that investigation was completed by obtaining presence of petitioner under body warrant and charge-sheet is already filed would require consideration. Except Crime no.42/2024 (supra), there are no other criminal antecedents and petitioner succeeded in securing bail in same. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has held as follows: “21. ………………. object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty.” - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 12. Point for consideration is answered in affirmative. Hence, following: O R D E R Petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused shall be enlarged on bail, in case of arrest in Crime no.43/2024 of APMC Navanagar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 307, 332, 353 of IPC, subject to following conditions: a) Petitioner shall appear before Investigating Officer within 15 days from date of this order and execute personal bond for sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for likesum. b) He shall not threaten, tamper with or influence prosecution witnesses, either directly or indirectly. c) He shall not leave jurisdiction of Dharwad District without prior permission, until completion of trial. d) He shall attend Court proceedings regularly. e) He shall not indulge in any criminal activities. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1284 CRL.P No. 103280 of 2024 f) He shall forthwith inform any change of residence to Investigating Officer. g) It is clarified that all observations herein are prima facie and not bind trial Court. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE EM,GRD CT: PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51