Case Law Details
Injamam Shariff Vs State By Kengeri Police (Karnataka High Court)
It is not in dispute that on theft of phone, a complaint is registered against unknown persons with an allegation that a mobile phone was snatched from the hands of the complainant. The petitioner is arrested along with one another after a week and sent to judicial custody on the ground that he is a habitual offender and having criminal antecedents. The learned Sessions Judge accepts the plea of the prosecution that if the petitioner is granted bail he is likely to commit the alleged offence again and would tamper evidence and hamper investigation. The reasoning rendered by the learned Sessions Judge is fundamentally flawed. There is no recovery of the phone made from the hands of the petitioner. Though the matter is still under investigation FIR being filed against unknown persons, merely because the petitioner and another are alleged to be habitual offenders or have criminal antecedents, the petitioner remaining in jail for the offence which is yet to be investigated is unjust.
High Court deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. imposing certain conditions
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
