VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Karnataka High Court 2026 › High Court of Karnataka

Mr Noor Ahmed v. State by

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Karnataka
Decided
20 February 2026
Bench
Mohammad Nawazauthor
Case no.
CRL.P 15495/2025

Follow Karnataka High CourtFollow Mohammad Nawaz

Judgment

NC:(2026:KHC:10487( CRL.P(No.(15495(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(20 (DAY(OF(FEBRUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(MOHAMMAD(NAWAZ(

CRIMINAL(PETITION(NO.15495(OF(2025((439(Cr.PC)( /483(BNSS))( ( BETWEEN:(( ( MR.NOOR,AHMED, S/O.,LATE,KHAJA,HUSEN,, AGED,ABOUT,45,YEARS,,R/AT.,NO.,04/172,, R.C.,NAGARA,,MANTRALAYLA,,,

KURNOOL,DISTRICT,,ANDHRA,PRADESH,, NOW,IN,CENTRAL,PRISON,,PINCODE-518345., …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.NARAYANA,SWAMY,G,,ADVOCATE), ,

AND:( ( STATE,BY, SUBRAMANYANAGARA,P.S.,, REPRESENTED,BY,STATE,PUBLIC,PROSECUTOR,,, VIJAYALAKSHMI HIGH,COURT,BUILDING,,BENGALURU-560001., M0KANKUPPI …RESPONDENT, (BY,SRI.K.RAHUL,RAI,,HCGP), Digitallytisignedtiby VIJAYALAKSHMI0M KANKUPPI , Location:0HIGHCOURT0OF KARNATAKA0DHARWAD , THIS,CRL.P,IS,FILED,UNDER,SECTION,483,OF,BNSS,,PRAYING, BENCH0DHARWAD TO,ALLOW,THE,PETITION,BY,GRANTING,BAIL,TO,THE,PETITIONER,IN, PURSUANCE,OF,S.C,NO.1314/2022,REGISTERED,BY,SUBRAMANAYA, NAGAR,P.S,PENDING,BEFORE,60,ADDL.CITY,CIVIL,AND,SESSIONS, JUDGE,, BENGALURU, (CCH-61), FOR, THE, OFFENCES, PUNISHABLE, UNDER,SECTIONS,120(B),,364,,302,,201,R/W.,34,OF,THE,IPC,1860,, IN,THE,INTEREST,OF,JUSTICE,AND,EQUITY.,, , , THIS, CRIMINAL, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, ORDERS, THIS, DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, , CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,MOHAMMAD,NAWAZ,

ORAL ORDER

This is a successive bail petition preferred by accused No.2 praying to enlarge him on bail in S.C.No.1314/2022 pending on the file of LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that this Court while dismissing Criminal petition No.1759/2024 vide order dated 21.06.2024, directed the trial Court to complete the trial within 9 months, however even after 20 months, the trial has not been completed. He contended that the prosecution has added 14 additional witnesses apart from 42 witnesses cited in the charge sheet and therefore, there is an inordinate delay in conclusion of the trial. He contended that the petitioner was arrested on

25.11.2021 and he is in judicial custody for more than 4 years 2 months. Hence, he prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail by imposing any conditions.

¶3Learned High Court Government Pleader contended that the trial is at the fag end and the petitioner

has approached this Court seven times and this Court has declined to release the petitioner on bail, considering the nature and gravity of the offence committed and the evidence collected against the petitioner. He contended that the petitioner even approached the Hon'ble Apex Court and withdrew the petition. He further submitted that if the petitioner is granted bail, he may flee from justice.

¶4This Court on more than one occasion has considered the prayer of the petitioner for bail on merits and in view of the prima facie materials collected against him, has rejected his prayer seeking bail. In Criminal petition Nos.1759/2024 dated 21.06.2024, trial Court was directed to complete the trial within 9 months from the date of receipt of certificate copy of the order. The trial is not completed within the said period. However, the petitioner unsuccessfully approached this Court subsequent to the said order, in Criminal Petition Nos.1864/2025, 8449/2025 and 9392/2025. He was permitted to file a fresh petition before the Sessions Court on changed circumstances. The learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 22.09.2025, has rejected

the bail petition, opining that there is no changed circumstances. The reason for the delay has been stated and it is also observed by the learned Sessions Judge that the Court is making all efforts to complete the trial expeditiously.

¶5In view of the submission made by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the trial is at the fag end and only 4 witnesses are left to be examined and out of them, 3 witnesses will be examined today, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the petition is dismissed.

SD/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

RKM CT:PA List No.: 19 Sl No.: 5

Source: High Court of Karnataka, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.