Karnataka High Court
Mr. Mahammed Thousif Akbar vs State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2023
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
CRL.P No. 12409 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12409 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. MR. MAHAMMED THOUSIF AKBAR
S/O AFFZAL PASHA
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
R/A NEHARU NAGARA
4TH CROSS, OPP SAHARA SHADI MAHAL
CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577101
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI ABUBACKER SHAFI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI ABDUL ANSAR P, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CHIKKAMAGALURU TOWN POLICE STATION
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T CHIKKAMGALAURU DISTRICT
Location: HIGH REP BY SPP
COURT OF HIGH COURT BUILDING
KARNATAKA
BANGALORE-01
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI H S SHANKAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.58/2021 OF CHICKMAGALUR TOWN POLICE STATION,
CHICKMAGALUR FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 504, 143, 144, 146, 147, 120B, 114, 323, 324, 302
AND 149 OF IPC AND ETC.
-2-
CRL.P No. 12409 of 2022
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader
appearing for the respondent-State.
2. This is a successive bail petition filed by the
petitioner/accused No.4 and this Court, earlier, rejected
the bail petition filed by this petitioner on 19.01.2022 in
Crl.P.No.10033/2021 wherein this Court, in paragraph 6,
considered the material available on record wherein it
discloses that there is an overt act allegation against
accused Nos.1 and this petitioner and also observed that
there are eye-witnesses to the incident i.e., CW12, 16 to
20 and other eye-witnesses have also sustained injuries
and comes to the conclusion that it is not a fit case to
exercise the discretion in favour of this petitioner and also
accused No.1.
CRL.P No. 12409 of 2022
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
relied upon the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in Crl.P.No.9609/2021 dated 22.12.2021 wherein
bail was granted in favour of accused No.2. The said order
was also considered in the earlier bail petition and this
Court held that the said order will not comes to the aid of
this petitioner when the specific overt act allegations are
made against this petitioner and accused No.1 and only an
allegation against accused No.2 in that order that he
assaulted with his hand. The counsel for the petitioner
would contend that the allegations against this petitioner
is that he pushed the victim as a result he fell down to the
drainage and also the material discloses that he fell down
on account of push made by this petitioner and accused
No.1 inflicted injury with the weapon on the victim. When
such being the material available on record, there is no
any changed circumstances in the present petition and
earlier also, the very same judgment of granting bail in
favour of accused No.2 was relied upon and today also the
same judgment is relied upon. Unless the petitioner
CRL.P No. 12409 of 2022
placed any other material before the Court and other than
the grounds which have been urged earlier, the question
of reconsidering the bail petition does not arise when the
same grounds are urged and the same material is placed
before the Court as that of in the earlier bail petition.
Hence, there is no ground made out to exercise the
discretion in favour 0of this petitioner in a successive bail
petition to enlarge him on bail.
4. In view of the discussions made above, I pass
the following:
ORDER
The bail petition is rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
