IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU Dated this the 11th day of December, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BUDIHAL R B Criminal Petition No 9010 of 2017 c/w Criminal Petition No 9153 of 2017 In Criminal Petition No 9010 of 2017: BETWEEN:
SHIVAKUMAR B S/O BOAPEDDALINGAIAH @ HANUMANTHAREDDY AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/A M C PALLI VILLAGE RAMAGIRI MANDALAM ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN CODE-515863 … PETITIONER [By Sri M Sashidhara, Advocate] AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THIRUMANI PS REP BY SSP HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001 ... RESPONDENT [By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP] CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CRPC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO 69/2017 OF THIRUMANI POLICE STATION, TUMKURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 379 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 4(1), 4(1A) AND 21 OF THE MINES AND MINERALS (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1957, AND RULE 44 OF THE KARNATAKA MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 1994.
In Criminal Petition No 9153 of 2017:
BETWEEN:
KARELINGAPPAGARI ANANDAPPA S/O K THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/A VEPAKUNTA VILLAGE KANAGANAPALLI ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN CODE-515 621 … PETITIONER [By Sri M Sashidhara, Advocate] AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THIRUMANI PS REP BY SSP HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001 ... RESPONDENT [By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP] CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CRPC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO 69/2017 OF THIRUMANI POLICE STATION, TUMKURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 379 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 4(1), 4(1A) AND 21 OF THE MINES AND MINERALS (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1957, AND RULE 44 OF THE KARNATAKA MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 1994.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Since these two criminal petitions are in respect of the same crime number, they are taken together and disposed of by this common order, in order to avoid repetition of discussion of law and facts.
2. Criminal Petition No 9010 of 2017 is filed by the accused No 1, said to be the driver of the vehicle involved in the crime, under Section 439 CrPC and Criminal Petition No 9153 of 2017 is filed by the accused No 2, said to be the owner of the vehicle involved in the crime, under Section 438 CrPC, seeking regular and anticipatory bail, respectively, in Crime No 69 of 2017, registered by the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 379 IPC and Sections 4(1), 4(1A) and 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, and Rule 44 of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petitions, FIR, complaint and other materials produced in the case.
4. Looking into the prosecution case, the allegation is that on 25-10-2017 at about 1.30 am, the complainant was on patrolling duty. By that time, he saw a tractor coming from Vadrevu road. The complainant stopped the tractor and enquired the driver and found sand in the trailer attached to the said tractor. The transportation of sand was without licence and the driver told that one Karilingappanavar Anandappa is the owner of the vehicle, who is the petitioner in Criminal Petition No 9153 of 2017. The driver was taken into custody and the tractor, trailer along with sand were seized under mahazar. On the basis of said complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioners herein for the aforesaid offences.
5. In so far as the petitioner in Criminal Petition No 9010 of 2017, who is the driver of the tractor, was apprehended when he was moving along with the said vehicle loaded with sand. The vehicle as well as sand was seized. The accused No 1 driver denied the case of the prosecution, stating that he has been falsely implicated in the case.
6. The second accused in the crime, who is the petitioner in Criminal Petition No 9153 of 2017 and said to be the owner of the said tractor-trailer, is arraigned as an accused on the basis of the statement made by the first accused. In so far as this petitioner-accused is concerned, whether he has given the vehicle fully knowing that it will be used for any illegal purpose or not is a matter to be ascertained during the course of trial. He has denied the allegation made by the prosecution.
7. Both petitioners have contended that they have not committed the alleged offences and that they are ready to abide by any reasonable conditions that may be imposed by the court. The alleged offences are triable by a Magistrate Court. The offences alleged against the petitioners herein are not exclusively punishable either with imprisonment for life or death.
8. Accordingly, both Criminal Petitions are allowed. The petitioners-accused 1 and 2 are entitled to regular and anticipatory bail respectively for the alleged offences, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of ` 50,000/- [Rupees fifty thousand only] each and shall furnish one surety for the likesum each to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ arresting authority.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner in Crime No 9010 of 2017 shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
iv. Petitioner in Crime No 9153 of 2017 has to make himself available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when called for and to cooperate with further investigation.
v. The petitioner in Crime No 9153 of 2017 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.
Sd/- JUDGE *pjk