Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 28 views

    Display PDF

    Uploaded by

    MOHAMMED ZAID
    The court heard arguments from the appellant's lawyer regarding the appeal against a lower court's order denying the appellant bail. However, the documents being relied upon were not produced in the lower court. The high court therefore could not consider these new documents. It gave liberty to the appellant to file a fresh bail application in the lower court, producing all relevant documents. It also noted the respondent agency could argue these new documents should not be considered. The appeal was disposed without relief to the appellant.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Display PDF

    Uploaded by

    MOHAMMED ZAID
    28 views4 pages
    The court heard arguments from the appellant's lawyer regarding the appeal against a lower court's order denying the appellant bail. However, the documents being relied upon were not produced in the lower court. The high court therefore could not consider these new documents. It gave liberty to the appellant to file a fresh bail application in the lower court, producing all relevant documents. It also noted the respondent agency could argue these new documents should not be considered. The appeal was disposed without relief to the appellant.

    Original Description:

    Order copy

    Original Title

    Display PDF (11)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The court heard arguments from the appellant's lawyer regarding the appeal against a lower court's order denying the appellant bail. However, the documents being relied upon were not produced in the lower court. The high court therefore could not consider these new documents. It gave liberty to the appellant to file a fresh bail application in the lower court, producing all relevant documents. It also noted the respondent agency could argue these new documents should not be considered. The appeal was disposed without relief to the appellant.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    28 views4 pages

    Display PDF

    Uploaded by

    MOHAMMED ZAID
    The court heard arguments from the appellant's lawyer regarding the appeal against a lower court's order denying the appellant bail. However, the documents being relied upon were not produced in the lower court. The high court therefore could not consider these new documents. It gave liberty to the appellant to file a fresh bail application in the lower court, producing all relevant documents. It also noted the respondent agency could argue these new documents should not be considered. The appeal was disposed without relief to the appellant.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 4

    -1-

    NC: 2023:KHC:20528-DB
    CRL.A No. 1878 of 2022

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

    PRESENT
    THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
    AND
    THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
    CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1878 OF 2022
    BETWEEN:
    SUHAIL BASHA
    S/O AMEER BASHA
    AGED 28 YEARS
    R/AT NO 306, 1ST CROSS
    ASHWATHNGAR
    Digitally signed
    by HARSHITHA B UKBA MASJID STREET
    Location: High THANISANDRA
    Court of
    Karnataka BENGALURU.

    …APPELLANT
    (BY SRI. MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADVOCATE)

    AND:
    NATIONAL INVESTIGATING AGENCY
    MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
    GOI
    BRANCH OFFICE HYDERABAD
    REP BY SPL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
    -2-
    NC: 2023:KHC:20528-DB
    CRL.A No. 1878 of 2022

    OFFICE AT HIGH COURT COMPLEX


    OPP TO VIDHAN SAUDA
    BANGALORE 560001

    …RESPONDENT
    (BY SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR P, SPL. PP)

    THIS CRL.A FILED U/S.21(1) R/W 21(4) OF N.I.A


    ACT, 2008 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT
    PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO
    SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20.07.2022
    AND GRANTING REGULAR BAIL TO APPELLANT IN
    SPL.C.C.NO.152/2021 U/S 16,18,20 OF UA(P)ACT, 1967
    SEC.120B,34,149 R/W 143,145,147,148,427,436,353 OF
    IPC AND SEC.2 OF KARNATAKA PREVENTION OF
    DESTRUCTION OF LOSS OF PROPERTY ACT, WHEREIN THE
    APPELLANT IS ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.6, SAME IS
    PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 49th ADDL. CITY CIVIL
    AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL. COURT FOR NIA CASES,
    BANGALORE (CCH-50).

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,


    SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE
    FOLLOWING:
    -3-
    NC: 2023:KHC:20528-DB
    CRL.A No. 1878 of 2022

    JUDGMENT

    We have heard Sri. Mohammed Tahir, learned

    counsel for the appellant for sometime. He started relying

    upon the documents produced by him along with memo

    dated 06.06.2023.

    2. The documents that he relies upon are FIR in

    Cr.No.223/2020 registered by D.J.Halli police station and

    charge sheet filed in connection with said FIR. When we

    put a question to Sri. Mohammed Tahir whether all these

    documents were produced before the Special Court in

    support of bail application filed on behalf of accused No.6-

    Suhail Basha, he submits that these documents were not

    produced. Therefore, we want to make it clear that since

    we are hearing an appeal filed against order dated

    20.07.2022 in Special C.C. No.152/2021 in connection

    with bail application of accused No.6, we cannot look into

    the documents which have not been produced before the

    Special court. If for any reason, the documents that


    -4-
    NC: 2023:KHC:20528-DB
    CRL.A No. 1878 of 2022

    Sri. Mahammed Tahir has produced are helpful to accused

    No.6 to claim bail, we give liberty to accused No.6 to

    approach the Special Court for Trial of NIA Cases,

    Bengaluru with a fresh application for bail and produce all

    the documents that are available with him for claiming

    bail.

    3. At the same time, we also make it clear that

    respondent- National Investigating Agency has got liberty

    to contend that the documents being produced by the

    accused No.6 cannot be looked into as per proviso to

    Section 43D(5) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention)

    Act, 1967. With these observations, we have disposed of

    the appeal.

    Sd/-
    JUDGE

    Sd/-
    JUDGE
    BH
    List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

    You might also like