Aslam vs State Of Karnataka

Krishna S.Dixit, J

Petitioner being the accused No.2 in S.C.No.1712/2019 arising from Crime No.245/2019 of Kadugondanahalli police station, Bangalore City for

offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 114, 452 & 307 r/w Section 34 of IPC, has presented this petition u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. 1973 seeking his

enlargement on regular bail.

After service of notice, the respondent â€" State having entered appearance through its learned HCGP Sri. Thejesh.P, opposes the petition.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Case Papers, this Court is of a considered opinion that this Petition needs

to be rejected for the following reasons:

(a) there is prima facie material available on record to show that accused No.1 and the petitioner had conspired to kill CW.2 by paying the supari in a

sum of Rs.10,000/-; the petitioner poured petrol on CW.1 Fougia Banu instead of on CW.2, when she was fast asleep during the midnight; this

happened by mistake of identity on account of the silence of the darkness; but had the nefarious offence been accomplished, the victim would have

been CW.2 and not CW.1;

(b) immediately after pouring petrol on CW.2, the petitioner rushed out of the house; there is evidentiary material collected by the Investigating Officer

as to this petitioner having bought the petrol from a fuel bunk;

(c) there is some reasonable material that supports the assumption as to the alleged illicit relationship between the petitioner and CW.2; the victim

CW.1 after being shifted to the hospital on 24.06.2019 at around 8.45 AM, has made a statement to the SHO of the K.G. Halli police station which

again militates against the pleaded innocence and harmlessness of the petitioner;

(d) regard being had to the totality of circumstances attending the case, it cannot be ruled out that the petitioner is most probably a potential threat to

the innocent victim namely CW.1 who happens to be the daughter of accused No.1 from the first wife; releasing such a person to the open, pendente

trial is unsafe to the society.

In the above circumstances, this Petition is rejected; however, a request is made to the Judge of the Court below to undertake speedy trial of the case,

of course keeping in view other pressing work.

It hardly needs to be stated that whatever observations hereinabove is made being confined to the disposal of the bail petition, shall not in any way

influence the trial and decision making in the pending criminal case.