IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B. CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6652 OF 2017 Between:
Purushotham H.S. S/o Swamygowda, Aged about 31 years, R/at, Kushalnagar extention, Sakaleshpura Town, Hassan Distrcict - 1 (By Sri. Pratheep K.C., Advocate.) And The State of Karnataka Rep. by Sakaleshpura town Police Station, Hassan District.
(By Sri.K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 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.33/2017 of Sakaleshpura Town P.S., Hassan District for the offence punishable under Sections 4 (1A) and 21 of MMRD Act and Section 379 of IPC.
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner-sole accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail and to direct respondent-police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4 (1A) and 21 MMRD Act and also under Section 379 of IPC registered by respondent- police station in Crime No.33/2017.
2. The factual story of the prosecution case as lodged in the complaint is that on 16.02.2017, police received information as to the transportation of the sand illegally near Henli check dam and on such information, when the complainant with his staff visited the spot, they found two pick-up vehicles bearing registration Nos.KA- 04-D-2187 & KA-13-TR-000964 and the drivers of the said vehicles fled away from the spot. The police have seized the vehicles along with the sand and then complaint came to be registered for the said offences.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned HCGP for the respondent- State.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the FIR, complaint and also the order passed by the learned Session Court rejecting the bail application of the present petitioner. Petitioner has denied the allegations made in the complaint and it is also not the case of the prosecution that the petitioner was apprehended at the spot. The allegation that he ran away after seeing police is denied at this stage by the petitioner. The two vehicles along with sand are already seized by the prosecution in the presence of panch witnesses. As the alleged offences are also triable by the Magistrate Court and are not exclusively punishable with death or life imprisonment, the petitioner be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions.
5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-Police is directed to release the present petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest for the above offences registered by respondent police station in Crime No.33/2017, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.50,000/- and has to furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner has to make himself available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when called for and to cooperate with further investigation.
iv. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute the personal bond and the surety bond.
dn/-
Sd/- JUDGE