“Karnataka High Court Grants Relief: Mr. Afsar Khan’s Anticipatory Bail Case”
Mr Afsar Khan vs State Of Karnataka
4 May, 2023
Bench: G Basavaraja
Facts:-
The petitioner, Mr. Afsar Khan, is the son of Late Basheer Khan and resides at No.912, 31st Cross, 4th T Block, Tialk Nagar, Bengaluru-560041. The case was filed against him by the State of Karnataka, represented by the Suddaguntepalya Police Station, Bangalore City-560093. The original complaint, filed by Mohammad Rafeeq, led to the registration of a case (Cr.No.69/2021) against accused Nos. 1 to 4, invoking various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
Petitioner’s Application and Trial Court Rejection:
Accused No. 1, Mr. Afsar Khan, submitted an application seeking a medical report from the prison authorities to ascertain his health condition. The purpose was to present the report in support of his pending bail application before the trial court. However, the learned Special Judge for CBI Cases rejected the application, prompting the petitioner to approach the Karnataka High Court.
Arguments and Observations:
The petitioner’s counsel argued that knowing the health condition of Mr. Afsar Khan was crucial for the trial court’s decision on the bail application. It was contended that the rejection of the Section 91 application by the trial court was legally unsustainable. The petitioner’s bail application highlighted his pre-existing health issues, including type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and chest pain. Despite being diagnosed with heart disease and receiving medication, the petitioner’s chest pain persisted.
High Court’s Decision:
Upon examining the case details, the High Court observed that the petitioner had filed the bail application citing his various health conditions, emphasizing the need to establish his health condition through the Section 91 application. The court referred to the proviso of Section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C), which allows the release on bail of a person who is sick or infirm. It noted that the trial court had not considered the provisions of the proviso of Section 437 and the procedure under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
Ruling and Directions:
In light of the circumstances and the need to safeguard the petitioner’s health while in judicial custody, the High Court allowed the criminal petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Consequently, the trial court’s order on the Section 91 application was set aside. The Section 91 application filed on behalf of the petitioner was allowed. The jail authorities were directed to promptly provide a report on the health condition of accused No. 1 to the trial court. Once the medical report was submitted, the trial court was instructed to dispose of the bail application in accordance with the law.
Conclusion:
The Karnataka High Court’s judgment in Mr. Afsar Khan’s case has granted him relief by setting aside the trial court’s order and allowing the Section 91 application to obtain his medical health status report. This decision highlights the importance of considering an accused person’s health condition, as mandated by the Cr.P.C. The outcome of the subsequent proceedings in the trial court will determine the fate of Mr Afsar Khan.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY SHREEYA S SHEKAR