State Of Karnataka vs Waseem Akram
2022 Latest Caselaw 629 Kant

                              1




    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                         BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

        CRIMINAL PETITION No.6357 OF 2020

BETWEEN:

STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY D.J.HALLI POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY STATE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001.                      ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI THEJESH.P., SPL.PP)

AND:

WASEEM AKRAM,
MAJOR,
SON OF FAJLUR RAHMAN,
NO.419/B, KUPPAN STREET,
PERIYAR NAGAR,
MUNESHWARA NAGAR,
D.J.HALLI, BENGALURU NORTH,
BENGALURU - 560 045.                     ...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI CHETAN.B.ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
          -ABSENT-

     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION
439(2) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION BY
CANCELLING THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE
XXVI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU DATED 19.09.2020 IN CRL.MISC.NO.25565/2020
IN CR.NO.223/2020 OF D.J.HALLI POLICE STATION, FOR THE
                                2




OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 144, 147,
148, 332, 353, 152, 307 R/W 149 OF IPC.

     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                            ORDER

Heard the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing

for the Petitioner/State.

The learned counsel for the Respondent/Accused No.6

had remained absent.

2. The present petition is filed for cancellation of

the bail granted in favour of accused No.6 passed by the

XXVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru

vide order dated 19.09.2020 in Crl.Misc.No.25565 of 2020

in Crime No.223/2020 of D.J.Halli Police for the offence

punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 332, 353,

152, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC. The main grounds urged

by the State before this Court are that without looking into

the material on record, the Trial Court has granted bail.

During the investigation, the bail has been granted and

permission was granted for identification parade on

26.08.2020. Though the said order was placed on record,

the Sessions Judge has allowed the bail petition. Hence, it

requires interference by this Court.

3. Having heard the learned Special Public

Prosecutor for the Petitioner/State, the main ground urged

in this petition is that during the test identification parade,

he has been granted bail and whether he is identified or not

is immaterial in the case of mob fury and hence, this is not

a fit case to exercise power under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C.

to cancel the bail. Hence, the petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DH