IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5805/2018 BETWEEN:
Syed Nadeem Uddin, S/o. Syed Nazeeruddin, Aged about 24 years, R/at No.20/30, 4th Main, 1st Cross, Opp. to Maruthi Layout, B.T.M. Layout, 1st Phase, Bengaluru – 560 029. ...Petitioner (By Sri. A.N.Radhakrishna, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, By Chandra Layout Police, Bengaluru Represented by The State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri. K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.15/2017 of Chandra Layout P.S., Bengaluru for the offence P/U/S 342, 370 R/w 34 of IPC and Sections 16, 17, 19 of Child Labour System (Abolition) Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying this Court to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.15/2017 of Chandra Layout Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 342 and 370 read with Section 34 of IPC, Sections 16, 17 and 18 of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner/accused No.1 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The genesis of the complaint shows that on 13.01.2017 at about 1-00 p.m., Police Inspector had received credible information that in the Plastic Industry situated at Azeez Sait Industrial Town, Nayandanhalli, some workers were kept as bonded labourers. After obtaining the permission of the superior officers along with the Labour Department Officials, the police made a raid on the said plastic industry and there they have noticed that some persons who are from Bihar State were kept in the factory without providing proper shelter and food and they were asked to work in the said plastic factory by confining them and also they were not providing any good food. On the basis of the complaint, a case came to be registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that accused No.3, who brought the said victims from Bihar, has been already released on bail. It is further submitted that the raid has been made on 13.01.2017 and as per the contents of the complaint, accused No.3 brought 19 persons on the night of 12.01.2017 at about 9.00 p.m from Bihar State and they have not yet started working in the factory of the petitioner. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that accused No.3 has brought the said persons by promising them that he is going to provide a job and as on the day of raid they were not working in the factory of the accused- petitioner. Police have not produced any documentary evidence to show that they were working in the said factory. He also submitted that alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The maximum punishment that could be imposed is imprisonment for 10 years. Further it is submitted that petitioner/accused No.1 is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused No.1 on anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that petitioner/accused No.1 has confined the said labours in his plastic industry, they have been ill-treated and harassed and even they have not been provided proper food and shelter. The petitioner/accused No.1 has committed the alleged offences under Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. He further submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 is absconding from the date of registering of the case. If the petitioner is released on bail, he may commit similar type of offences, he may abscond or he may not be available for the trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. A close reading of the contents of the complaint and other materials it reveals that it has been specifically stated that 19 persons are said to have been used for the purpose of bonded labour and they have been brought by accused No.3 on 12.01.2017 at about 9-00 p.m. under the guise that they are going to be provided with proper employment. It could be seen from the contents of the complaint that said raid has been made in the factory of the petitioner/accused No.1 at about 4.30 p.m. and the complaint has been registered at about 10.30 p.m on 13.01.2017. By going through the said materials, the involvement of the accused in the said act creates a doubt. Be that as it may, the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The only consideration which has to be considered at the time of granting bail is whether the accused can be secured for the purpose of trial that can be done for the same by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioner/accused No.1 is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice 8. In that light, petition is allowed and the petitioners/accused No.1 is enlarged on anticipatory bail in Crime No.15/2017 of Chandra Layout Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 342 and 370 read with Section 34 of IPC, Sections 16, 17 and 18 of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, subject to the following conditions:
1. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating Agency is directed to enlarge him on bail on he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
2. He shall surrender before the Investigation Agency within 15 days from today.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
4. He shall mark his attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the concerned police station till the charge-sheet is filed.
5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY