Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
1
KABC010349232022
IN THE COURT OF THE LVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH 57)
: Present :
Sri.T.Govindaiah, B.Com., LL.B.,
LVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
Dated this the 30th Day of January, 2023.
Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
PETITIONER
1. Sajjad Khan @ Sajjad
S/o Samsheer Khan
Aged about 26 years
R/at No.69, 1st Cross,
Tippu Nagar
Chamarajapete
Bengaluru
(By Sri.Abijith M.M. Advocate)
V/s
RESPONDENT
State of Karnataka
By Chamarajpet Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(Rep. by: Public Prosecutor)
Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
2
ORDER
This is a petition filed by the petitioner under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of regular bail in
Cr.No.163/2022 for the offences punishable under Secs.
307, 398 of IPC pending on the file of XXIV Addl. Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
2. The petitioner has sought for bail on the grounds
that, he is innocent of the alleged offence. He has got
valid and tenable defence. H was not aware about the
alleged incident. He never involved in the alleged offence
either
directly
or
indirectly.

He
has
been
falsely
implicated. He is in judicial custody since from last 25
years. There is no any prior enmity or fight or quarrel
between the deceased and the accused. The petitioner is
totally stranger to the alleged crime. No materials placed
on record to show that the petitioner is guilty of the
offences. He is a law abiding citizen and having old aged
parents. He is the only earning member of his family. He
Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
3
hails from respectable family and has got deep roots in
the society. He is a permanent resident of Bengaluru. He
is ready and willing to abide by the conditions that may
be imposed. He is ready to furnish surety. He undertakes
to
co­operate
with
the
investigating
agencies.

The
accused No.2 has got regular bail. Hence this petitioner is
also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.
3. The prosecution has filed statement of objections
that
the
alleged
offences
are
punishable
with
imprisonment for a period of 10 years. If the petitioner is
enlarged on bail he would tamper with the prosecution
witness. He would commit similar nature of offence. He
would flee from justice. He may not co­operate with the
investigation. Hence sought for dismissal of the petition.
4.

Heard the arguments of both sides.

5.

The
determination:­
following
points
arise
for
my
Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
4
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
regular bail as provided under Section 439
of Cr.P.C.?
2. What order?
6.

My findings on the above said points are as
follows;
Point No.1
:
In the Negative
Point No.2
:
As per final order, for the
following :­
REASONS
7.

Point No.1:­ As seen from the prosecution
papers it reveals that, on 21.12.2022 at about 11.00 p.m
the complainant’s eyes were burning and he went to
medical shop to bye medicine.

After some time the
complainant come to the house and told that phone pay
is not working and asked for money. Accordingly the
father of the complainant gave Rs.100/­ and the
complainant went to the medical shop. At about 11.49
p.m the complainant called his father and asked him to
Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
5
come urgently near medical shop. Accordingly the father
of the complainant went near the shop and saw his son
coming by holding his stomach and blood was coming
from his stomach. Thereafter he asked the complainant
about the incident. The complainant told that when he
was coming after taking the medicine an unknown
person called him to come and the complainant refused
to go there. The person came near the complainant and
attempted to commit robbery of his mobile. When the
complainant tried to rescue, the person stabbed the
complainant by knife on his stomach. Thereafter the
father of complainant took him to Victoria hospital.
8.

During
the
respondent police have
course
of
investigation
the
conducted mahazar and sized
blood stained shirt, blood stained baniyan, one night
pant and reported in PF NO.97/2022. On 24.12.2022 the
respondent police have arrested the petitioner
remanded to judicial custody.

and
Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
6
9.

It is the arguments of the learned counsel for
petitioner that the petitioner is innocent. He is not at all
committed any offence as alleged. There is a inordinate
delay in filling the complaint.
10. On perusal of the records it is clear that the
petitioner has not produced any documents to show that
the victim is still taking treatment or not. If the alleged
injuries are simple or grievous. Moreover the petitioner is
the
main
accused
in
the
alleged
incident.

The
investigation is under progress. No documents are
produced to show that the injured is discharged from the
hospital. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail he would
tamper with the prosecution witness and threaten the
complainant. Hence considering the nature and gravity of
offence and threat to the complainant, the court is of the
view that petitioner is not entitled for bail. Accordingly
the point is answered in the Negative.

Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
7
10. Point No.2:
In view of my findings on point
No.1, I proceed to pass the following:­
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioner under Section
439 of Cr.P.C., is hereby dismissed.

(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected and
then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 30 th Day of
January, 2023)
(T.Govindaiah)
LVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.

8
Crl.Misc.No.554/2023
9
Crl.Misc.No.554/2023