High CourtsSingle Bench

Srinivasa & Ors vs State of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 12 January 2018 · Citation: (2018) 01 KAR CK 0030

HON’BLE JUDGES
Budihal R.B.
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=3863>Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973</a>, <a href=3863-438>Section 438</a> - Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest · <a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-379>Section 379</a> - Punishment for theft<BR
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
6902 of 2017

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 440 words
1.

This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent-

police to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1) and Section 21(1) of the MMRD

Act and Section 379 of IPC registered in respondent police station Crime No.128/2016.

2.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 and also the learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

3.

Case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with other accused persons were transporting sand in the lorry without having any valid

documents like permit or licence and also without paying royalty to the Government. When the vehicles were intercepted by the police they noticed

that the sand which was loaded in the said vehicles was in excess of the permission given for transporting. On the basis of the said complaint case

was registered for the alleged offences.

4.

I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

5.

The vehicles along with the loaded sand are already seized by the police at the spot in the presence of panch witnesses under seizure mahazar.

At present nothing further is to be seized form the possession of the petitioners herein. They have denied the entire prosecution case contending

that there is a false implication and are ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by the Court. The alleged offences are triable

by the Magistrate Court and are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, I am of the opinion that petitioners can be

granted with anticipatory bail.

6.

Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-Police are directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the alleged

offences punishable under Sections 4(1) and Section 21(1) of the MMRD Act and Section 379 of IPC registered in respondent police station

Crime No.128/2016, subject to the following conditions:

i. Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each and shall furnish one surety 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 shall make themselves available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when called for and to cooperate with the

further investigation.

iv. Petitioners 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.