NAUFAL Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner who is arrayed as Accused No. 2 in SC No. 114/2013 on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Mangalore, registered for the offences punishable u/Ss. 143, 147, 148, 307, 324, 427, 504, 506 read with 149 of IPC is before this court praying for enlarging him on bail pending disposal of the trial in the said Sessions Case. It is the case of the prosecution that on 22.1.2011 at about 11.30 p.m., this petitioner along with ten others formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons, like talwars, rods near Kallakatte of Bajal Village, coming within the jurisdiction of Mangalore Rural Police Station and in furtherance of the common object of their unlawful assembly, they ransacked - the complainant's shop by breaking the empty cool drinks bottles apart from causing damage to the door of his shop and further at that time when one Shakeel and Abdul Razzak came to the said place, the accused are alleged to have assaulted them with weapons with which they were armed and caused them severe injuries and also left the place by threatening with dire consequences.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been arrested on 27.04.2013 and since then he is in custody. His application for bail has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge solely on the ground that he is involved in other cases registered for heinous offences. He submits that he has already been enlarged on bail in all those cases including the case which has been registered for the offence punishable u/S. 302 of IPC. He further submits, in this very case, this petitioner had been granted anticipatory bail by the jurisdictional Sessions Judge. This petitioner was arrested in connection with case registered for the offence punishable u/S. 302 of IPC and therefore he could not appear in the present case. Subsequently, he was shown as arrested in this case also on 27.04.2013. Since he had been granted anticipatory bail in this very case during the pendency of the investigation and as he has already been enlarged on bail in all other cases that has been registered against him including the case registered for the offence punishable u/S. 302 of IPC and as injuries alleged to have been caused on the two victims, viz., Shakeel and Abdul Razzak are simple in nature as per the medical certificate placed on record and as he is in custody since 27.04.2013, he be released on bail.

(3.) Learned Government Pleader vehemently opposes the application and contends, having regard to the cases that have been registered against the petitioner, it indicates that he is a habitual offender and if he is enlarged on bail, there is likelihood of he tampering with the prosecution witnesses and also absconding from taking his trial and therefore the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.