IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.559 OF 2019 BETWEEN MR. PUSHPARAJ CHOWTA S/O. VENKAPPA CHOWTA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT D.NO.3-107, BADIGUDDE HOUSE, MANI POST AND VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA – 574 253.
(BY SRI RAHUL RAI K., ADVOCATE) AND SMT. R. PADMASHREE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (INCHARGE), MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, DAKSHINA KANNADA, MANGALURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE – 560 001.
(BY SRI S.T. NAIK, H.C.G.P) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 READ WITH 401 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE CONDITION THAT "PETITIONER SHALL FURNISHING SECURITY IN THE FORM OF RENEWAL BANK GUARANTEE FOR DOUBLE THE VALUE OF THE VEHICLE TO THE SATISFACTION BEFORE THE COURT BELOW", IMPOSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT DAKSHINA KANNADA, MANGALURU DATED 15.04.2019, IN CRL.MISC.NO.538/2019, WHILE RELEASING VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA-19-D-5135 IN P.F.NO.38/2018-19 ON AN APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 451 READ WITH 457 OF CR.P.C.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Learned State Public Prosecutor accepts notice for the respondent.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
This petition filed by the petitioner under Section 397 of Cr.P.C., being aggrieved by the condition imposed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K.Mangaluru in Crl. Misc. No.538/2019 in respect of furnishing Bank Guarantee double the value of the vehicle vide order dated 15.04.2019.
The fact of the case is that the petitioner said to be the RC owner of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-19-D- 5135 which has been seized by the Mines and Geology Department on the ground that the vehicle was engaged in transporting sand and involved in commission of the offences under Section 4(1), Section 9, 22, 23(C) IE and G and 24(1) E, read with 21(1) of MMDR Act of 1957.
The petitioner has filed an application before the Court below for releasing the vehicle in his favour. The learned Sessions Judge allowed the application filed by the petitioner under Section 451 read with 457 of Cr.P.C., with a condition to release the vehicle in favour of the petitioner and to furnish security in the form of renewal of Bank Guarantee for double the value of the vehicle to the satisfaction of the Court below and with other conditions and the same is aggrieved by the petitioner and contended that the value of the vehicle itself is Rs.3,00,000/- and furnishing Bank Guarantee is not required. The petitioner is ready to execute Indemnity Bond for the value of the vehicle and in support of the case, he has also relied upon the order of this Court passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.375/2019 dated 28.03.2019 in similar case wherein this Court has modified the Bank Guarantee into Indemnity Bond with a surety.
Perused the order of this Court in an identical case wherein this Court has taken the lenient view and directed the RC owner to execute the Indemnity Bond with a surety by modifying the order of Bank Guarantee.
Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the condition imposed by the Sessions Court in respect of Bank Guarantee is hereby required to modify as Indemnity Bond. Accordingly, I pass the following:
i) Criminal Revision Petition is allowed.
ii) The order of furnishing security in form of renewal of Bank Guarantee double the value of vehicle passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K.Mangaluru in Crl. Misc. No.538/2019 is hereby modified and ordered to execute Indemnity Bond for Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakh only) with two surities for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Since the main petition itself is disposed off, I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration. Hence, the same is also dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE GBB