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

Smt Reshma W/O Munavar Pasha vs The State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|13 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.544/2019 BETWEEN :
Smt.Reshma W/o Munavar Pasha Aged about 35 years R/at: No.408, Near Alfala Masjid Ghousia Nagar, Mysuru Mysuru District-577 101 (By Sri Lethif B., Advocate) AND :
The State of Karnataka by Udayagiri Police Station Mysuru District Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court Building Bangalore-560 001.
(By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) … Petitioner … Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to release the petitioner on bail in Crime No.7/2019 of Udayagiri Police Station, Mysuru District for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii) of NDPS Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R The present petition is filed by accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to release her on bail in Crime No.7/2019 of Udayagiri Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii) of NDPS Act.
2. The gist of the complaint is that on 9.1.2019 at about 9.30 a.m., the respondent-police when they were on patrolling duty received a credible information that there is a transportation of ganja and at that time, they found a lady wearing burka holding a carrying bag in her hand along with another person. On seeing the police vehicle, they tried to run away from the said place and they were also hiding the bag. When the police saw the suspicious circumstance, they chased and apprehended them. On an enquiry being made, they revealed their names as Reshma and Athiq and on search of the bag they found ganja and other leaves, buds and seeds and they were not possessing any license for transporting such ganja which was weighing 1 kg 800 grams. On the basis of the same, a case was registered in this behalf.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and she is suffering with medical ailments. Respondent-police have not followed the procedure as contemplated under Sections 41, 42, 43 and 50 of the NDPS Act. He further submitted that when the ganja is said to have been seized, it was containing leaves, buds, flowers and seeds and in order to constitute it as ganja it should be separated and even the said ganja which has been seized is less than the commercial quantity and therefore the provisions of Section 37 of the Act are not applicable. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions and to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner-accused No.1 along with accused No.2 was apprehended red handedly and caught with ganja and she is the main accused as she has been transporting and selling ganja. He further submitted that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, she may indulge in similar criminal activities, she may abscond and may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the papers including the complaint.
7. On close reading of the contents of the complaint, seizure proceedings have been taken place and the respondent-police have seized ganja from buds, flowers, leaves and other material. In order to call it as ganja it must be flower or buds or seeds and not leaves. Be that as it may, seized ganja is only 1 kg and 800 grams, which is less than commercial quantity and as such the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted. The alleged offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, it would meet the ends of justice.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed and accused No.1-petitioner herein is enlarged on bail in Crime No.7/2019 of Udayagiri Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii) of NDPS Act, subject to the following conditions:-
i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
ii) She shall be regular in appearing before the trial Court till the trial is concluded.
iii) She shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iv) She shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission.
v) She shall mark her attendance before the jurisdictional police till the trial is concluded once in fifteen days between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m.
vi) She shall not indulge in similar type of activities in future.
In view of disposal of this petition, I.A.No.1/2019 filed for interim bail, is dismissed as it does not survive for consideration.
Sd/- JUDGE *ck/-
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

Smt Reshma W/O Munavar Pasha vs The State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
13 February, 2019
Judges
  • B A Patil