Yasmeen Alias Jasmin vs The State Of Karnataka
2025 Latest Caselaw 6281 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Yasmeen Alias Jasmin vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 June, 2025

Author: S Vishwajith Shetty

Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty

                                                    -1-
                                                               NC: 2025:KHC:20842
                                                          CRL.P No. 6735 of 2025


                    HC-KAR



                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                              DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

                                               BEFORE

                          THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

                              CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6735 OF 2025

                   BETWEEN:

                   YASMEEN ALIAS JASMIN
                   W/O UMAR FAROOQ
                   AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
                   R/AT ANCHEKERI STREET
                   SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN
                   MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 571 438
                   PERMANENT ADDRESS, NO.174
                   8TH CROSS, BELLANDUR
                   BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
                   BENGALURU - 560 103.
                                                                     ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI B. VIJAY SHETTY, ADV.)
                   AND:

                   1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed
by NANDINI M            REPRESENTED BY SRIRANGAPATNA
S                       POLICE STATION, MANDYA TALUK AND
Location:               DISTRICT - 571 438, REPRESENTED BY
HIGH COURT              GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE
OF
KARNATAKA               HIGH COURT BUILDING
                        BENGALURU - 560 001.

                   2.   AKRAM PASHA
                        S/O LATE ABDUL JAFAR
                        AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
                        R/AT LIC OFFICE ROAD
                        DODDA JONIGARA STREET
                        SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN
                        MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 571 438.
                                                                   ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M, HCGP)
                              -2-
                                          NC: 2025:KHC:20842
                                      CRL.P No. 6735 of 2025


HC-KAR



      THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED BY 483 OF BNSS)
PRAYING    TO   ENLARGE     THE   PETITIONER    ON    BAIL  IN
SPL.C.NO.205/2024 CR.NO.169/2023 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE
THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA (SITTING
AT SRIRANGAPATNA) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 302,
201, 511 OF I.P.C AND SECTION 75 OF JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE
AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT, 2015, IN THE ABOVE CASE,
REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 I.E., SRIRANGAPATNA POLICE
STATION, MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT, ON THE BASIS OF THE
COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE COMPLAINANT, ONE MR.ARKAM PASHA
ON 20.08.2023 NIGHT 00-01 HOURS, VIDE ANNEXURE-B.

     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.2 in Spl.C.No.205/2024 pending before

the Court of Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Mandya arising

out of Crime No.169/2023 registered by Srirangapatna

Police Station, Mandya District, for offences punishable

under Sections 302, 201 & 511 of IPC & Section 75 of the

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children), Act,

2015 is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023

seeking regular bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

NC: 2025:KHC:20842

HC-KAR

3. FIR in Crime No.169/2023 was registered by

Srirangapatna Police Station, Mandya District against

Umar Farooq and the petitioner for the aforesaid offences,

based on the first information dated 20.08.2023 received

from Sri Akram Pasha S/o. Late Abdul Jafer. During the

course of investigation, the petitioner herein was arrested

on 21.08.2023 and subsequently remanded to judicial

custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet has

been filed against two persons for the aforesaid offences

and the petitioner herein is arraigned as accused No.2 in

the charge sheet.

4. Bail application filed by the petitioner in

Spl.C.No.205/2024 before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court

was rejected on 13.11.2024. Therefore, the petitioner is

before this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner, who is a married lady having no criminal

antecedents is in custody for about 22 months. Trial in the

NC: 2025:KHC:20842

HC-KAR

case is yet to commence. The case of the prosecution is

based on circumstantial evidence. Accordingly, he prays to

allow the petition.

6. Per contra, learned HCGP, who has opposed the

petition submits that accused Nos.1 and 2 have assaulted

and committed the murder of a girl, aged about 10 years

and thereafter tried to burry the dead body of the girl. She

submits that considering the gravity of the offence alleged,

the prayer made by the petitioner needs to be rejected.

7. FIR in the present case was registered against

Umar Farooq and the petitioner herein, based on the first

information submitted by one Akram pasha S/o Abdul

Jafer on 20.08.2023. In the first information, it is alleged

that the on 19.08.2023 at about 8.00 p.m, the first

informant was informed by his friend that accused Nos.1

and accused No.2, who allegedly is the second wife of

accused No.1 were ill-treating and assaulting Firdosa, who

is the daughter of accused No.1 from his first wife Ayesha.

NC: 2025:KHC:20842

HC-KAR

When the first informant was about to leave to the house

of accused persons, he was informed by his friend that

accused No.1 Umar Farooq had already shifted his

daughter to a hospital and subsequently he was also

informed that Firdosa had died as a result of assault and

accused No.1 had taken her in his auto rikshaw for the

purpose of burying the dead body. Immediately,

thereafter, the first informant and his friend went to the

place, where accused No.1 was making arrangements to

burry the dead body of deceased Firdosa, aged about 10

years and thereafter submitted first information, based on

which, FIR in Crime No.169/2023 was registered by

Srirangapatna Police Station, Mandya against accused

Nos.1 and 2.

8. During the course of investigation, accused

Nos.1 and 2 were arrested and charge sheet was filed

against them for the aforesaid offences. Perusal of the

material on record would go to show that, accused Nos.1

and 2 were being tried by III Addl. District & Sessions

NC: 2025:KHC:20842

HC-KAR

Judge, Mandya in S.C.No.5087/2023 for the charge

sheeted offences and after completing trial in

S.C.No.5087/2023, the matter was posted for

'pronouncement of judgment'. It appears that at that

stage, the learned Sessions Judge realized that the case

was required to be tried before the special Court and

therefore entire case papers were transferred to Court of

Principal District and Sessions Judge, Mandya and de nova

trial is now being held against accused Nos.1 and 2 in

Spl.C.No.205/2024 by the Court of Principal District and

Sessions Judge, Mandya. The material on record would go

to show that, charges have been now framed against

accused Nos.1 and 2 in S.C.No.205/2024 and examination

of charge sheet witnesses is yet to commence.

9. From a perusal of the averments found in the

first information and the averments found in the charge

sheet it is apparent that, case of the prosecution with

regard to alleged assault made by accused Nos.1 and 2 in

their house on 19.08.2023 is based on circumstantial

NC: 2025:KHC:20842

HC-KAR

evidence. However, postmortem report would reveal that

deceased Firdosa, aged about 10 years had suffered 19

injuries on her body and in the final report, it is stated that

death of the deceased is as a result of multiple injuries

sustained by her.

10. Accused No.1 is the person, who had shifted the

dead body of his daughter in his autorikshaw and had tried

to burry the dead body of deceased in a hurried manner.

There is no such allegation in the first information or in the

charge sheet that accused No.2 had accompanied accused

No.1, while he shifted the dead body of his daughter

Firdosa in his autorikshaw to the place, where he intended

to bury her. The first informant, who had gone to the

place, where accused No.1 was making arrangements to

bury the dead body of deceased has not spoken about the

presence of accused No.2 in the said place. It is accused

No.1, who had informed the first informant that deceased

had died as a result of electric shock, whereas the

NC: 2025:KHC:20842

HC-KAR

postmortem report would go to show that, the deceased

had died as a result of multiple injuries sustained by her.

11. The petitioner has raised a specific contention in

her petition that she is not the wife of accused No.1 and

on the other hand she is married to Basheer saab and in

support of her contention she has also produced her adhar

card. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the

petitioner, who is a married lady is in custody for about 22

months. The trial in Spl.C.No.205/2024 is yet to

commence.

12. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter,

and also having regard to proviso to Section 437 of Cr.P.C,

I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner

for grant of regular bail is required to be answered

affirmatively.

13. Accordingly, the following:-

ORDER

The petition is allowed.

NC: 2025:KHC:20842

HC-KAR

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in

Spl.C.No.205/2024 pending before the Court of Prl.

District & Sessions Judge, Mandya arising out of Crime

No.169/2023 registered by Srirangapatna Police Station,

Mandya District, for offences punishable under Sections

302, 201 & 511 of IPC & Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice

(Care and Protection of Children), Act, 2015, subject to

the following conditions:

a) The 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 her 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;

- 10 -

NC: 2025:KHC:20842

HC-KAR

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against her is disposed off.

Sd/-

(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS