IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1722/2025 (21(NIA))

BETWEEN:

MR.MOHAMMED KALEEM AHMED S/O MOHAMMED JAFFAR AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/AT NO.401, 4^TH FLOOR HONEY ENCLAVE, NEAR PETROL BUNK SHAMPURA ROAD, GANDHINAGAR K.G. HALLI, BENGALURU – 560 045 …APPELLANT (BY SRI MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS BRANCH OFFICE, BENGALURU

3^RD FLOOR, BSNL TELEPHONE EXCHANGE Digitally signed by K S HAL 2^ND STAGE, INDIRANAGAR RENUKAMBA BANGALORE – 560 008 REP. BY ITS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE …RESPONDENT Location:

High Court of Karnataka (BY SRI SACHIN C, ADVOCATE FOR SRI P.PRASANNA KUMAR, SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 21(4) OF NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY ACT, 2008 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31.07.2025 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE HONBLE XLIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES), (CCH-50), BENGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.141/2021 AND CONSEQUENTLY APPRECIATE THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 439 AT ANNEXURE-D ETC.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL)

Challenging the rejection of his bail application, the appellant/accused No.19 in Special Case No.141/2021 on the file of XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Court for the trial of NIA cases) (CCH-50) Bengaluru has preferred this appeal.

2. Appellant along with 137 other accused is being tried in Special Case No.141/2021 for the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 353, 333, 332, 436, 427 and 149 of IPC, Sections 16, 18 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short ‘UAP Act’) and Section 2 of the Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act, 1981.

3. Case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

On 11.08.2020 at 8.45 p.m. motivated by extreme religious ideologies accused who were initially about 25 to 30 in number gathered in-front of K.G Halli police station and began shouting slogans demanding the arrest of one P.Naveen, a nephew of Sri Akhanda Srinivasa Murthy, MLA of Pulakeshi Nagar Constituency, Bengaluru alleging posting of a derogatory comment against Prophet Mohammed on his facebook account. By 8.50 p.m. the numbers increased and all accused led by accused No.14 entered the premises of K.G Halli Police Station demanding registration of FIR against P.Naveen and others. By that time on the same allegations, FIR was already registered in Crime No.195/2020 of D.J Halli Police station, Bengaluru. Despite informing that, accused were not convinced. Therefore, K.G.Halli police accepted complaint and registered case in NCR No.384/2020. Despite that, accused and other protesters instigated by prime accused, became unruly and police imposed curfew within the jurisdiction of both K.G Halli and D.J Halli police stations to bring the situation under control. However, accused insisting to handover P.Naveen to their custody, started vandalizing the police station, forcing police to resort to lathi charge. The mob attempted to snatch weapons from the police personnel and kill them, which led to an order to open fire, resulting in death of one person. Rioters damaged 12 government and private vehicles and inflicted injuries on the police personnel.

4. At the relevant time and place, accused No.19 was strong supporter and mentor of SDPI, Accused No.20 was active member of SDPI and accused Nos.21 and 22 were active supporters of SDPI. Accused No.24 had joined the said gang near K.G Halli Police Station in conducting conspiracy meeting, then the said gang reached K.G Halli police station. It is alleged that appellant along with other accused set ablaze Innova Car parked near K.