Mohammed Mujeeb Ulla @ Mujeeb @ Maula v. National Investigation Agency

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.897 OF 2026 (21(NIA)) BETWEEN:

MOHAMMED MUJEEB ULLA @ MUJEEB @ MAULA S/O. SHAIKH AMEER JAN AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT H NO.66, 5TH MAIN 5TH CROSS, GANGANAGAR, R.T. NAGAR BENGALURU-560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI MOHAMMAD TAHIR, ADVOCATE) AND:

NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS REPRESENTED BY ITS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BRANCH OFFICE, BENGALURU NO.3RD FLOOR, BSNL TELEPHONE EXCHANGE HAL 2ND STAGE INDIRANAGAR BENGALURU-560 008. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR, SPL.PP) * * *

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 21(4) OF NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY, ACT, 2008 PRAYING TO SET

Digitally signed by ANJALI M Location: High Court of Karnataka

ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25-5-2026 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE XLIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES), (CCH-50), BENGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.181 OF 2017 AT ANNEXURE-A AND GRANT THE INTERIM BAIL FOR A PERIOD OF DAYS TO APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4 IN SPL.C.NO.181 OF 2017 UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 302, R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 16(1)(a), 18 AND 20 OF UA(P)A, 1967, PENDING IN THE FILES OF HON'BLE XLIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES) (CCH-50) BENGALURU.

THIS CRIMINAL 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 by accused No.4 is preferred under Section 21(4) of NIA Act, 2008 against the order dated 25.05.2026 passed by the Court of XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Court for the trial of NIA cases) (CCH-50) at Bengaluru in Spl.C.No.181/2017.

¶2The appellant is praying to set-aside the impugned order and to enlarge him on bail for a limited period of 90 days, on medical grounds.

¶3The prayer is opposed by the respondent/NIA by filing statement of objections.

¶4Appellant is facing trial along with four other accused for the offences punishable under sections 302 r/w 34 of IPC, 120B IPC, 16(1) (a), 18 and 20 of UA(P) Act.

¶5Since the prayer for bail is on medical grounds, the merits of the case need not be adverted to.

¶6The appellant had approached this Court in Crl.A.189/2026 praying to enlarge him on bail for taking treatment for his dental issues. This Court vide order dated

17.03.2026 disposed of the said appeal, with a direction to the Chief Superintendent, Central Prison, Bangalore to provide appropriate and timely treatment to the appellant at Dento Cure, as advised by the Dental Surgeon and also to give follow-up treatment.

¶7It appears that the appellant was taken to Dento Cure Clinic, however, the Doctor has requested the Court to transfer the case to other Dental Clinic/Government affiliated hospital. As per the said report, the patient/appellant could not afford the treatment charges. However, it is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that no proper treatment was available at Dento Cure and therefore, he could not be treated. He further submits that the appellant was admitted at Victoria Hospital under surgery department as he was suffering from gangrene, due to which, partial amputation of his toe has been performed. He submits the appellant requires further treatment and appropriate care for the current dental condition which is causing him immense pain and discomfort as well as for the gangrene in his foot due to diabetic and failure to provide him timely treatment may result in worsening of the condition and resulting in further health complications.

¶8Per-contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would contend that the appellant is receiving regular medical treatment and he was also admitted

at Victoria Hospital and such being the case, he is not entitled to the relief of bail on medical grounds.

¶9It is not in dispute that no treatment to the dental issue was provided to the appellant at Dento Cure after this Court passed an order on 17.03.2026, directing the Chief Superintendent, Central Prison, Bengaluru to provide proper and timely treatment to the appellant. Further, it is not in dispute that the appellant was further hospitalised at Victoria hospital and surgery was conducted and due to gangrene, one of the toes was amputated. In that view of the matter, for a limited period, on medical ground, the relief sought by the appellant can be granted, on appropriate terms and conditions:-

Hence, the following:- ORDER

¶1The appellant shall be released on bail on executing a bond in a sum of ₹1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court;

¶2He shall furnish proof of his residential address and shall inform the Court if there is change in address;

¶3He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses/evidence;

¶4He shall regularly appear before the trial Court on every date of hearing and shall co-operate for the early disposal of the case;

¶5He shall surrender before the trial Court on the expiry of 90 days from the date of his release.

¶6Appeal is allowed in the above terms. The order dated 25th May 2026 passed by learned XLIX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Judge for trial of NIA cases) (CCH-50), Bengaluru, in Spl.C.No.181/2017 is accordingly set-aside.

Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

MNList No.: 1 Sl No.: 1