Criminal Petition No. 6084 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:22169 CRL.P No. 6084 of 2025 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION No. 6084 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / BETWEEN: 483(BNSS)) 1. MOHAMMED SHOAIB @ SHOAIB, S/O SIRAJ PASHA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, RESIDING AT No.1063, BEHIND ATHEEK MASJID, NEAR AYYAPPA TEMPLE, DAYANANDA NAGAR SLUM, SOMESHWARA NAGARA, JAYANAGAR 1ST BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560011. Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (NOW HE IS IN J.C. IN THE ABOVE CASE SINCE 18-12-2024, CENTRAL PRISON, BENGALURU CITY)
Legal Reasoning
1959, is before this Court in this successive bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., (U/S.483 BNSS), seeking regular bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. FIR in Crime No.306/2024 was registered by Siddapura Police Station, Bengaluru, initially for the offence punishable - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:22169 CRL.P No. 6084 of 2025 HC-KAR under Section 109(1) read with Section 3(5) of BNS against Ansar and two others based on the first information dated 17.12.2024 received from Nagina Banu wife of Fairoz Khan, who is the maternal aunt of deceased Salman Khan. During the course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested on 17.12.2024. The injured Salman Khan, who was admitted in the hospital, had subsequently died. Thereafter, Section 302 of IPC was invoked in the present case against the accused. The bail application filed by the petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.3 in the charge sheet was rejected by the jurisdictional Sessions Court vide order dated 08.04.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.2780/2025. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The allegation of assaulting the deceased on his head with weapon is only found against accused Nos.1 and 2. Though there is allegation that petitioner had stabbed the deceased with knife, Post Mortem Report of the deceased would go to show that no stab injury was found on the dead body of the deceased. Hence, he prays to allow the petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:22169 CRL.P No. 6084 of 2025 HC-KAR 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader while opposing the petition submits that there are eyewitnesses to the incident in question and they have specifically stated that the petitioner had stabbed the deceased with knife. Hence, prays to dismiss the petition. 6. The first information was submitted by the maternal aunt of the deceased Salman Khan on 17.12.2024, in which, she has alleged that on 17.12.2024, at about 4.00 a.m., she had seen Salman Khan shouting at somebody. When accused Nos.1 and 2 questioned him, he allegedly abused them in filthy language and therefore, accused Nos.1 and 2 all of a sudden assaulted Salman Khan on his head with a wooden club. After Salman Khan fell down, accused Nos.1 and 2 assaulted him with machete and thereafter the petitioner assaulted Salman Khan with his hands and also stabbed him with a knife. In the charge sheet, which is filed after investigation, similar allegations are found against accused Nos.1 to 3. Post Mortem Report of the deceased Salman Khan would go to show that his death was as a result of head injury sustained. The allegation of assaulting the deceased Salman Khan with weapons on his - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:22169 CRL.P No. 6084 of 2025 HC-KAR head is found in the first information as well as in the charge sheet only against accused Nos.1 and 2, who are in custody. 7. So far as the petitioner is concerned, it is alleged that he had initially assaulted Salman Khan with his hands and thereafter stabbed him with a knife. However, the Post Mortem Report would go to show that there was no stab wound found on the body of the deceased. Undisputedly, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. He is in custody from 17.12.2024. Investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet is filed. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that the prayer for grant of bail made by the petitioner is required to be answered affirmatively. 8. Accordingly, the following; (i)
Arguments
(BY SRI MOHAMED IBRAHIM, ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER AND: 1. STATE BY KARNATAKA, BY THE SHO OF SIDDAPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY - 560011 (REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560001) (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M., HCGP) …RESPONDENT - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:22169 CRL.P No. 6084 of 2025 HC-KAR THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.439 (FILED U/S.483 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.306/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S/ 103(1) R/W SEC.3(5) OF BNS 2023 AND ALSO FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 25(1-B)(B) OF INDIAN ARMS ACT 1959 OF SIDDAPURA POLICE STATION WHICH IS PENDING IN THE S.C.NO.323/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE LXII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (CCH-63). 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.3 in S.C. No.323/2025 pending before the LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.306/2024 registered by Siddapura Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section 25(1-B) (B) of the Indian Arms Act,
Decision
The petition is allowed. (ii) The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.306/2024 registered by Siddapura Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) read with 3(5) of BNS and Section 25(1-B) (B) of the Indian Arms Act, 1959, subject to the following conditions: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:22169 CRL.P No. 6084 of 2025 HC-KAR (a) Petitioner shall execute 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 MV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40