Mohammed Mujeeb Ulla @ v. National Investigation Agency

NC:(2026:KHC:15765-DB( CRL.A(No.(189(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(17 (DAY(OF(MARCH,(2026(

PRESENT( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(MOHAMMAD(NAWAZ( AND(( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(VENKATESH(NAIK(T( CRIMINAL(APPEAL(NO.(189(OF(2026((21(NIA))( BETWEEN:(( (

, MOHAMMED,MUJEEB,ULLA,,@,, MUJEEB,,@,,MAULA, S/O,SHAIKH,AMEER,,

AGED,ABOUT,55,YEARS,, TH R/AT,,H,NO.,66,,5 ,,MAIN,,, TH5 ,,CROSS,,GANGA,NAGAR,,,

RT,NAGAR,, BENGALURU,-,560,032,, …APPELLANT, (BY,SRI.,MOHAMMED,TAHIR,,ADVOCATE),

AND:( ( Digitally , NATIONAL,INVESTIGATION,AGENCY,signedtiby LAKSHMI0T MINISTRY,OF,HOME,AFFAIRS,, Location: REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,SUPERINTENDENT,OF,POLICE,High0Court of0Karnataka BRANCH,OFFICE,,BENGALURU, , RDNO.,3 ,FLOOR,,BSNL,TELEPHONE,EXCHANGE,,, NDHAL,2 ,,STAGE,,INDIRANAGAR,,, BANGALORE,-,560008., …RESPONDENT, (BY,SRI.,PRASANNA,KUMAR,P.,,SPL.,P.P.), , THIS, CRL.A, IS, FILED, U/S, 21, (NIA), BY, THE, ADVOCATE, FOR, THE, APPELLANT, PRAYING, THAT, THIS, HONOURABLE, COURT, MAY, BE, PLEASED, TO, SET, ASIDE, THE, ORDER, DATED, 15/09/2025,PASSED,BY,THE,HONBLE,XLIX,ADDL.,CITY,CIVIL,

AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES), (CCH - 50), BENGALURU IN SPL.C NO. 181/2017 AT ANNEXURE - A AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

This appeal under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 is filed against the order dated 15.09.2025 passed by the learned XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Judge for trial of NIA cases), Bengaluru in Spl.C.No.181/2017, whereby the Special Court has turned down the prayer of the appellant / accused, seeking to enlarge him on bail on medical grounds.

¶2Heard both sides and perused the material on the record.

¶3Appellant is accused No.4 before the trial Court in Spl.C.No.181/2017, facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 121A of IPC and Sections 17, 18, 18B and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Application under Section 439(1) of Cr.P.C. read with Section 55A, 437(1) and 439 of Cr.P.C. was filed before the Special Court to enlarge the appellant on bail for a period of 90 days, on the ground that he is suffering from serious dental issues. The Learned Special Judge, vide impugned order rejected the prayer, observing that the jail authorities have provided proper medical treatment for his dental issue in a private hospital and the consultation / prescription, dated 04.04.2025 issued by the doctor of Dentocure discloses that he has visited dentocure with the history of pain in his upper / lower, back / front teeth past many days and needs follow-up for his dental issue, which is being provided by the jail authorities.

¶4It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that appellant is only seeking temporary humanitarian release to take treatment and plantation of

teeth. His condition and gravity of ailment is reflecting from his medical records submitted by the jail authority and his condition has not been improved and presently he is in the verge of losing all his teeth. He submitted that in the present situation, a critical and medical treatment is required and the current dental condition of the appellant is causing immense pain and discomfort and failure to provide timely treatment may result in worsening of the condition, leading to further health complications as almost 20 teeth of the appellant is already broken.

¶5We have perused the treatment particulars pertaining to the appellant furnished by the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Special Public Prosecutor. As per letter dated 18.11.2025 issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Central Prison Hospital, Bengaluru, on many occasions, the appellant was referred to Government Dental College Hospital on complaint of dental issues, done - extraction/oral prophylaxis and advised medications. As per the Court order, he was

referred to Dento Cure, Rachenahalli Main Road, Thanisandra, Bengaluru, and was advised medications and procedures - Total extraction of teeth and fabrication of complete Denture, which requires 6 appointments at frequent interval of 3 months. It is mentioned that, currently he requires a Denture procedure for which he will be referred to Government Dental College Hospital.

¶6The learned Special Public Prosecutor has furnished a report of Dento Cure, wherein the doctor has stated that the patient requires fabrication of complete Dentures and the treatment is localized and does not require any hospitalisation. It is a treatment requiring 6-7 appointments with intermittent intervals. In the light of the same, we are of the view that the Chief Superintendent, Central Prison, Bengaluru, can be directed to provide appropriate treatment for the dental issues canvassed by the appellant at Dento Cure, wherein the appellant has been treated earlier.

¶7The appeal is disposed of, with a direction to the Chief Superintendent, Central Prison, Bengaluru, to provide appropriate and timely treatment to the appellant at Dento Cure, as directed by the Dental Surgeon and follow-up treatment shall also be provided. The appellant shall not be handcuffed during treatment and the escort police are hereby directed to permit the presence of wife/children of the appellant during the treatment.

¶8The copy of the order shall be marked to the Director General, Prison.

Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

LDC,AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10