- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49911 CRL.P No. 14643 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 14643 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MOHAMMED YUSUF S/O RABBANI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT No. 2696, 5TH CROSS SUNNI CHOWK, MANDIMOHALLA MYSURU - 570 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LETHIF B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY E AND N CRIME POLICE STATION MYSURU DISTRICT REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO RELEASE THEM ON BAIL IN SPL.C.No.489/2024 OF E AND N CRIME P.S MYSURU CITY IN CR.No.15/2020 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 20(B)(ii)(b) OF NDPS ACT, PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU. Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49911 CRL.P No. 14643 of 2025 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner –accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to grant bail in Special Case No.489/2024 arising out of Crime No.15/2020 of E and N Crime Police Station registered for offence punishable under Section 20(B)(iii)(b) of NDPS Act pending on the file Principal District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent –State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner earlier was granted bail by order dated 06.01.202 by imposing conditions. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared till 27.09.2021 and he remained absent on that day. The petitioner has been secured by executing NBW on 15.08.2025 and from that day he is in - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49911 CRL.P No. 14643 of 2025 judicial custody. The petitioner is stated to have violated condition of not to leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission. The petitioner stated to have gone to Dubai for eking out his livelihood and he remained there for 04 years. The petitioner is ready to co-operate with the speedy trial of the case. With this, he prayed to allow the petition. 4. Per contra, learned High Court Government pleader for the respondent –State would contend that the petitioner has violated the bail conditions and went to Dubai. The said act of the petitioner has caused hindrance in disposal of the case registered against the petitioner and accused No.1. Due to the absence of the petitioner the case came to be split up against him. If the petitioner is again granted bail, there are chances of flee from justice and not available for trial. With this, she prayed to reject the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49911 CRL.P No. 14643 of 2025 5. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has perused charge sheet and other materials placed on record. 6. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Special Case No.513/2021 facing trial for offence punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)(b) of NDPS Act. The petitioner by order dated 06.01.2021 has been granted bail and he has been released on bail on 07.01.2021. The petitioner remained absent from 27.09.2021. NBW has been issued against him from time to time. The petitioner came to be secured on 15.08.2025 by executing NBW issued against him and since then he is in judicial custody. The petitioner remained absent for nearly 04 years. The absence of the petitioner caused delay in disposal of the case registered against him and against accused No.1. Due to the absence of the petitioner, the case against him has been split up and now registered in Special Case No.489/2024. The reason assigned for absence of the petitioner is that he went to Dubai for eking out his livelihood. The said act of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49911 CRL.P No. 14643 of 2025 the petitioner itself indicates that he has violated the conditions imposed by the Special Court while granting in bail. The absence of the petitioner has caused delay in disposal of the case registered against him. If the petitioner is again granted bail, there are chances of he remaining absconding and not available for trial. Considering the above aspect, the petitioner has not made out any grounds for grant of bail. In the result, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE DSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61 Ct.sm