IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.254/2024 (21(NIA))

BETWEEN:

MR.MOHAMMED SALIN S/O KHAZA MOHIDDIN

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

R/AT ASURAN EAST STREET MELAPALYAM, TIRUNELVELI

TAMILNADU …APPELLANT

(BY SRI SIRAJUDDIN AHMED, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

VYALIKAVAL POLICE STATION

CCB, BENGALURU

Digitally REP. BY SPL. PP

signed by K S

HIGH COURT BUILDING

RENUKAMBA

BENGALURU - 560 001 …RESPONDENT

Location:

High Court of

(BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, SPP-II)

Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 21(4) OF

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 11.07.2023 AND ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.381/2015 C/W S.C.No.1347/2016 ON THE FILE OF VYALIKAVAL POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 121, 121A, 123, 201, 307, 435, 332 OF IPC, SECTIONS 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 AND 20 OF UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) ACT, 1967, SECTIONS 3, 4, 5, 6 OF THE EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT, 1908 AND SECTION 4 OF PREVENTION OF DAMAGE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY ACT, 1984

PENDING BEFORE THE XLIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES) CCH-50 AT BENGALURU.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 04.12.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, K.S.MUDAGAL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

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

CAV JUDGMENT

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

Challenging dismissal of his bail application, accused No.14 in S.C.No.381/2015 & S.C.No.1347/2016 on the file of XLIX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge (Special Court for trial of NIA Cases) (CCH-50), Bengaluru has preferred this appeal.

2. Appellant and 22 others are being tried in S.C.No.381/2015 & S.C.No.1347/2016 on the charge that the accused motivated by extreme religious ideologies conspired to wage war against India and indulged in Jihadi activities. In execution of such conspiracy and to take revenge against ruling BJP Government in Karnataka for the arrest of Abdul Nasar Madani, they decided to blast bombs near BJP office in Bengaluru, Karnataka. In execution of such conspiracy, they planted bombs near BJP office, Malleswaram, Bengaluru. Due to explosion of those bombs, police vehicles, private vehicles were extensively damaged, police personnel and some public were also injured.

3. Appellant’s first application for bail was rejected by the Trial Court. He filed successive bail application on the ground of delay in trial. The same was opposed by the prosecution on merits as well as denying the delay on its part in conducting the trial.

4. The trial Court on hearing the parties, by the impugned order has rejected the application of the appellant on the ground that there are no changed circumstances to reconsider the prayer for bail in a successive application. So far as the delay, the trial Court held that the accused themselves are guilty of causing such delay.

5. Heard both side.

Submissions of Sri Sirajuddin Ahmed, learned Counsel for appellant:

6. Absolutely there is no material to show the involvement of the appellant in the crime. He is implicated in the case only based on the confessional statement of the co- accused. Appellant is languishing in jail since 2013. There are

273 charge sheet witnesses and still large number of witnesses have to be examined. The trial is getting delayed. If ultimately, the appellant is acquitted, his fundamental right to life and liberty gets seriously affected.

7. In support of his submissions, he relies on the following judgments:

(i) SK.Javed Iqbal v. State of U.P.

(ii) Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra Submissions of Sri Vijayakumar Majage, learned SPP-II for respondent:

8. There is sufficient material to show that appellant was supplier of the explosives to accused No.3/the key accused and he was also part of the crime of bo