Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

M Raghavendra vs E

High Court Of Karnataka|29 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO. 5101/2019 BETWEEN M RAGHAVENDRA S/O MARI RAO AGED 40 YEARS OCC:AGRICULTURIST R/O NO.13, HANCHALI-ULUVE KAVADI, SRINGERI TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 139 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVINDRA B. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SRINGERI POLICE STATION KOPPA SUB DIVISION CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 139 REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BENGALURU – 560 001 …. RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. P. YOGANNA, HCGP) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.60/2019 OF SRINGERI P.S., CHIKKAMAGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/Ss. 4(1), 4(1A), 21 OF MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner (A1) and the learned HCGP for the Respondent–State. Perused the records.
2. The allegations made against this petitioner (A1) in brief are that, after lifting the sand from Tunga River with the help of JCB and Tractors, he has stored the same in his adjacent land for the purpose of unlawful gain.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 20.06.2019 at about 2.45 pm., near Welcome Gate of Sringeri, when the Police Inspector of Sringeri Police Station with his subordinates were on patrolling duty, they got credible information that, some persons have illegally stored sand near Kavadi Village. On the basis of the said information, the said police went to the spot and found about 80 Tractor loads of sand worth Rs.3,00,000/- which was stored in the said place. Therefore, suspecting that, without any permit or licence, one Hanchali Raghu has stored the sand in the said place, wrote a report at the spot and sent the same to the Police Station for registration of a case. Thereafter, a case in Crime No. 60/2019 came to be lodged by respondent-Sringeri Police for the offences punishable under Sections 379 of IPC along with Sections 4, 4(1) & 4(1)(A) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 ( for short, ‘MMRD Act’), which is now pending before the Court of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Shringeri, Chickmagalur.
4. The allegations disclose that the alleged sand was actually stored in the adjacent land of the petitioner (A1) and not in the land of the petitioner. There is no material to show that the accused has actually transported the sand, which said to have been stored in the said place. It is submitted that, the alleged sand has already been seized by the said police.
5. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of this case, at this stage, since there is no material to show that, the petitioner (A1) is the owner of the alleged land, actually where the alleged sand was found and the offences being not punishable with serious punishment and considering the nature of the allegations, in my opinion, the petitioner (A1) is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner (A1)-M.Raghavendra shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest by Sringeri Police, in connection with Crime No.60/2019, registered for the aforesaid offences, now pending before the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Sringeri, Chickmagalur, on following conditions:-
i) The petitioner (A1) shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within Ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and he shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-
sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.
ii) The petitioner (A1) shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner (A1) shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation, and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner (A1) shall not leave the jurisdiction of Chickmagalur District without prior permission, till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months whichever is earlier.
v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week ie, on every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
KGR* Sd/-
JUDGE
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M Raghavendra vs E

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
29 August, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra