IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF JUNE 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4457/2017 BETWEEN:
1. SRI VINYA S/O PAPANNA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/O DONIGAL VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI SAKALESHPURA HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 134 (DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-04-D-2187) 2. PURUSHOTHAMA S/O LATE SWAMYGOWDA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/O HOUSING BOARD KUSHALNAGAR EXTENSION SAKALESHPURA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 134 (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-04-D-2187) …PETITIONERS (BY SMT.BHAGEERATHI L., ADV. FOR SRI BHOJARAJA, ADV.) AND:
STATE BY SAKALESHPURA TOWN POLICE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI S.VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.175/2016 OF SAKALESHPURA TOWN P.S., HASSAN DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 4(1A), 21 OF MMRD ACT AND SEC.379 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioners apprehend arrest by the respondent-police in their Cr.No.175/16 in respect of the offences punishable under section 379 of IPC and sections 4(1A), 21 of MMRD Act.
3. The allegation is, the pick up van of which the 2nd petitioner is the owner was found indulging in illegal transportation of sand on 5.8.2016. The vehicle along with the incriminating material is seized by the Investigating Officer.
4. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petition so far as the 1st petitioner is concerned may be dismissed as not pressed. So far as 2nd petitioner is concerned, he is innocent and was not on wheels of the vehicle when the same was seized.
5. Considering the nature of allegation and the submission made on behalf of the 2nd petitioner, the petition is partly allowed.
6. The petition insofar as 1st petitioner is concerned, is dismissed as not pressed.
7. The petition insofar as the 2nd petitioner is concerned is allowed. He is granted anticipatory bail in Cr.No.175/2016. He shall forthwith appear before Investigating Officer. In that event, the respondent- Investigating Officer is at liberty to interrogate him. In the event of his arrest, he shall be enlarged on bail on executing a self bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum. He shall co-operate with the respondent- Investigating Officer during further course of investigation and shall not use his vehicle for illegal purpose.
Dvr:
Sd/- JUDGE