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

Muralidhar @ Murali vs State Of Karnataka Suryanagar Police

High Court Of Karnataka|18 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO. 7577/2019 BETWEEN MURALIDHAR @ MURALI S/O CHANDRAPPA, AGED 37 YEARS R/AT MARSUR MADIVALA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU RURAL – 562 106 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.S. VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. C.C. GANGADHARAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA SURYANAGAR POLICE STATION ANEKAL TALUK – 562 106 REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001 … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ROHITH B.J, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.326/2019 OF SURYANAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.20(C) OF NDPS ACT AND SEC.332, 353 AND 307 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and the learned HCGP for the Respondent –State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.8 in Crime No.326/2019 of Suryanagar Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 20(c) of NDPS Act and Sections 332, 353 & 307 of IPC, now pending before the Court of the II Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC Court, Anekal, Bengaluru.
3. The brief facts of the case are that, on 23.09.2019 at about 3.00 p.m., on receipt of a credible information that, Ganja is transported in a Scorpio Car near Shettihalli-Marasuru Road, Madiwala Village, the complainant- Mr. Victor Simon, who is the Police Officer of respondent-Suryanagar Police Station, along with some police personnel, went to the said place and near the land of one Nanja Reddy the police have intercepted the vehicle passing through the road by putting barricades across road at 4.10 p.m. At that time, on seeing the police, the driver of the said Scorpio vehicle tried to run away from the spot. However, the driver of the said car was caught hold and at the time of enquiry, the said person attacked one of the police personnel police. At that time, in order to prevent him and to protect themselves, the police have fired at the said person, as a result of which, the driver of the said car received a bullet wound on his leg and thereafter he was admitted to the hospital. Thereafter, the police have seized the car and 340 Kgs. of Ganja which was kept in the car. After the arrest of the driver of the said vehicle, he divulged the names of some accused persons including this petitioner.
4. The allegation made against this petitioner is that, he is an autorikshaw driver and he was helping Accused No.1 in transporting the Ganja on various times. Except that, there is no specific allegation against this petitioner and no NDPS drug has been seized from this petitioner.
5. At present it is not known as to what is the relationship between this petitioner and Accused No.1 and it is also not known, whether this petitioner was running his autorikshaw as his profession or knowing fully well that Accused No.1 was involved in the NDPS Drug business, he was participated in the alleged illegal act. Therefore, all these aspects have to be thrashed- out during the course of detailed investigation and also during the full-dressed trial.
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, the petitioner is the autorikshaw driver. He has already been arrested and since the date of his arrest, he has been in judicial custody and there is no such recovery at his instance.
7. Since there is no recovery of any incriminating articles from this petitioner and since he has already been arrested, investigated and interrogated by the concerned police, in my opinion, he is no more required for any further investigation. Therefore, in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Hence, the following,-
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner (A8)- Muralidhar @ Murali shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.326/2019 of respondent-Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 20(c) of NDPS Act and also under Sections 332, 353 & 307 of IPC, now pending before the II Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC Court, Anekal, Bengaluru, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission, till the case registered against him is disposed of.
v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week ie., on every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet or for a period of two months, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE KGR*
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

Muralidhar @ Murali vs State Of Karnataka Suryanagar Police

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
18 November, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra