IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8886/2017 BETWEEN:
Veerabhadraiah Aged about 55 years S/o Late Bhadraiah R/o Andanigowdanapalya Huthridurga Hobli Kunigal Taluk Tumkur District-572 126. ... PETITIONER (By Sri Honnappa, Adv. a/w Sri H L Jayaramu, Adv.) AND:
State of Karnataka By Kunigal Police Station By State Public Prosecutor High Court Building Bangalore City-560 001. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.518/2017 of Kunigal P.S., Tumkuru District, for the offence P/U/S 20(A) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the offence punishable under Section 20(A) of the NDPS Act registered in respondent police station Crime No.518/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the complaint averments are, on credible information complainant along with panchas and staff visited the backyard of the petitioner’s house on 21.10.2017 at about 4.30 p.m. and found two ganja plants grown were removed and mahazar was conducted at the spot in the presence of panch witnesses. The said plants were totally weighing 4 kgs. 200 gms. On the basis of said complaint, case was registered for the alleged offence against the petitioner.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.
5. It is the case of the prosecution that after receiving the information that the petitioner has grown ganja plants behind his house, the complainant, his staff and panchas proceeded to the said place. In the complaint there is no specific mention that there is compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act.
6. The petitioner has contended in the petition that there is false implication and he has not grown ganja plants. He is ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by this Court. Though it is stated in the seizure mahazar that the ganja was seized was weighing 4 kgs. 200 gms, but the panchanama shows that the entire ganja plants uprooted were weighed and not only flowers and fruits. The quantity of the ganja seized is also lesser than the commercial quantity. The offences alleged are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner may be admitted to anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offence punishable under Section 20(A) of the NDPS Act registered in respondent police station Crime No.518/2017, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and shall 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 shall make himself available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when called for and to cooperate with the further investigation.
iv. 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.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp