Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Y S Yeshwanth And Others vs The State By Kora Police Station

High Court Of Karnataka|31 October, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7505/2017 BETWEEN:
1. Y.S. YESHWANTH S/O. Y.B. SURESH, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O. SHIVASHREE NO.180, OPP. M.G. STADIUM, SHARADA DEVI NAGAR TUMKURU-572 102.
(OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REG NO. GA-04-T-2262) 2. S. SHANKARAPPA, S/O. SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O. GULUR HAND POST, TUMKUR KASABA, TUMKUR-572 109.
(DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REG NO. GA-04-T-2262) ...PETITIONERS (BY SMT. VIJAYA M.N., ADV.) AND THE STATE BY KORA POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-570 009.
...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. CHETAN DESAI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.145/2017 OF KORA P.S, TUMKURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/RULES 379 OF IPC AND SEC.42, 43, 44 OF KARNATAKA MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES AND SEC.4(1), 4(1A) OF MINES AND MINERALS DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest for the offences punishable under Section 379 and Sections 42, 43 and 44 of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rule 1994 and Sections 4(1) and 4(1A) of MMDR Act, 1957 registered with the respondent-police station in Crime *No.145/2017.
*Corrected as per Court order dated 14.11.2017.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the complaint averments are that when the vehicle bearing Regn.No.GA-04-T-2262 was inspected by the police authority on 14.8.2017, the petitioners were found transporting granite stone blocks in the said vehicle without any documents, without permit and licence to carry the same. Hence, a complaint came to be filed and on the basis of which the case was registered against the petitioners who are said to be the driver and owner of the said vehicle.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 is that they are having licence and permit for transportation of granite stones. As the vehicle which was having the permit was in a damaged condition, the vehicle in question was used for transporting the granite stones and unfortunately the relevant documents were not kept in the vehicle in question at the time of inspection by the police authority. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the documents produced along with the petition to show that petitioners were having the relevant permit from the competent authority for transportation of the granite stones. Further, it is submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they are ready to abide by any of the reasonable conditions that may be imposed by this Court. The petitioners have shown that they were not involved in committing the offences alleged. Further the offences alleged are exclusively triable by the Magistrate Court and they are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, the petitioners have made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.
5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to release the petitioners- accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail, in the event of their arrest in Crime *No.145/2017 for the aforesaid offences subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioners have to execute a personal bond for Rs.50,000/- each and have to furnish one solvent surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioners have to make themselves available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when called for and to cooperate with the further investigation.
iv. Petitioners have to appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute *Corrected as per Court order dated 14.11.2017.
the personal bond and the surety bond.
*alb/-.
Sd/- JUDGE
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

Y S Yeshwanth And Others vs The State By Kora Police Station

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
31 October, 2017
Judges
  • Budihal R B