IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.5518/2017 BETWEEN:
A.S.SARDAR S/O ABDUL SADIQ AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT NO.LIG-2, K.H.B. COLONY NANJANAGUD TOWN NANJANAGUD TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. VEERABHADRA SWAMY H.P., ADV.,) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH BEGURU POLICE STATION, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-01.
... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S.RACHAIAH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.PC. PRAYING TO RELAXATION OF CONDITION NO.1 IMPOSED BY THIS HON’BLE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR IN CRL.R.P.NO.68/2017 ORDER DATED 08.06.2017 AS PER ANNEXURE-A (CRIME NO.105/2017) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard Sri.Veerabhadra Swamy H.P., learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent. Perused the records.
2. Though matter is listed for Admission by consent of both parties, it is taken up for final disposal and disposed of by this order.
3. Petitioner filed an application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. for release of lorry bearing registration No.KA-09-C-4183 before the jurisdictional Magistrate. After considering the application, learned Magistrate by order dated 13.04.2017 rejected the said application. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed a Revision Petition before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar, in Criminal Revision Petition No.68/2017. The learned Sessions Judge by allowing the Revision Petition and the application filed by the petitioner under Section 457 Cr.P.C., ordered for release of said vehicle conditionally, namely petitioner was not only directed to execute an indemnity bond of `6,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum and additional conditions were also imposed. In so far as, imposition of condition directing the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee, petitioner is before this Court assailing the same, contending interalia that under similar circumstances this Court had only restricted the prayer for furnishing indemnity bond by the applicant by setting aside the condition for furnishing the bank guarantee.
4. Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent-State would also not dispute this fact.
5. Having regard to the fact that this Court in Criminal Petition No.2387/2017 disposed of on 20.03.2017 and also Criminal Petition No.6040/2017 disposed of on 18.08.2017 had relaxed the condition insofar as furnishing of bank guarantee is concerned and had directed the release of vehicle by directing the applicant to furnish the indemnity bond with one surety, this Court is of the considered view that petitioner is also entitled for similar relief. In view of the fact that jurisdictional Sessions Court itself has imposed condition of directing the petitioner to furnish indemnity bond of Rs.6,00,000/- with one surety, this Court is of the considered view that it would suffice. However, additionally it may be ordered that in the event of said vehicle is found plying for the purpose of carrying out the activity similar to the one alleged or the vehicle in question is found to be involved for same offence, indemnity bond executed by petitioner shall be forfeited and vehicle shall be confiscated.
6. Subject to above and the conditions as imposed by the Revisional Court in Criminal Revision Petition No.68/2017 dated 08.06.2017 (Annexure-A), namely condition No.1 would stand set aside and in substitution to the same, it is ordered as under:
“It is further directed that in the event of vehicle in question is found to be involved in similar offence, the indemnity bond executed by petitioner shall stand forfeited and vehicle shall stand confiscated to the State”.
Accordingly, criminal petition stand allowed.
SD/- JUDGE DR