Karnataka High Court
Hussain Basha S/O. Basha Sab vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 January, 2022
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL PETITION No.102488/2021
BETWEEN:
1 . HUSSAIN BASHA S/O. BASHA SAB
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
OCC. BUSINESSMAN
R/O. THORANAGALLU,
SANDUR TALUK
DIST. BALLARI-583123
2 . KABEERSAB ALIAS KABEER HUSSAIN
S/O PEERSAB
R/O THORANGALLU,
SANDUR TALUK,
DIST. BALLARI-583123.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI SANTOSH B.MALAGOUDAR AND
SHRI CHETAN T.LIMBIKAI, ADVOCATES)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THORANAGAL P.S.
REPRESENTED BY S P P
SPP OFFICE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI RAMESH B.CHIGARI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT CRIMINAL PETITION AND
ENLARGE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR
ARREST ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS DEEMS FIT IN
THORANAGAL P.S. CRIME NO.131/2021 FOR THE OFFENCES
2
PUNISHABLE UNDER GAS SUPPLY ACT (LPG ACT REGULATION
AND SUPPLY DISTRIBUTION ORDER 2000), 1939, U/S 3, 4, 6,
7, ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955, U/S 3, 6(A), 7,
KARNATAKA ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES (STORAGE ACCOUNTS
MAINTAINING VALUE NOTIFICATION) ORDER 1981, U/S 3(2) (i)
(4), SECTION 285, 336, 337, 420 OF IPC 1860.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. by accused Nos.1 and 2 to enlarge them on anticipatory bail in Cr.No.131/2021 of Thoranagal police station registered for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 6 and 7 of the Gas Supply Act (LPG Act Regulation and Supply Distribution Order, 2000) 1939, under Sections 3, 6(A) and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Sections 3 (2)
(i), 4 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Storage Accounts Maintaining Value Notification) Order, 1981, Sections 285, 336, 337 and 420 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned High Court 3 Government Pleader for respondent/State and perused the material on record.
3. It is the case of prosecution that on 15.11.2021 at about 11:30 p.m., the complainant namely the Tahsildar of Sandur received a credible information about blasting of LPG gas cylinder in a house situated near HLC Canal. He rushed to the spot along with the Food Inspector and Panchas and noticed blasting marks of gas cylinders and damage caused to RCC. In the said house, he found 1 filled commercial gas cylinder, 6 empty commercial LPG cylinders of Bharat Company, 4 empty commercial cylinders of Indane Company, 15 filled LPG domestic gas cylinders and 7 empty domestic LPG gas cylinders. The said cylinders were seized under a panchnama in the presence of panchas. Further, from the shop of accused No.1, 27 empty LPG cylinders, 2 filled LPG gas cylinders, 6 empty commercial LPG cylinders, 1 filled LPG 4 cylinder and 1 filled domestic gas cylinder were also seized. Further, from the shop of accused No.1 situated near Sunklamma Gudi in Toranagallu village, they found totally 13 filled gas cylinders and 11 empty gas cylinders. In all they seized 94 gas cylinders under a panchnama.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for petitioners that accused No.1 sustained injuries in the blast and he is taking treatment in the hospital. Accused No.2 is the owner of the shop wherein accused No.1 is conducting business. He submits that the entire allegations that the petitioners are doing business illegally is false and that is a matter of trial. He submits that the petitioners are permanent residents of Toranagallu village having movable and immovable properties and they are ready and willing to abide by any conditions and willing to furnish sufficient surety. 5
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader contends that the matter is still at investigation stage and therefore, submits that in the event of grant of any relief to the petitioners, they may not co-operate with the investigation and they may involve in similar type of offences.
6. At this stage, there is sufficient material to show that both the petitioners have stored the gas cylinders without any permit or licence. After receiving the credible information about the blasting of cylinder, complainant and other officials went to the spot and seized the cylinders under a panchnama. Prima facie, it is seen that the petitioners have stored LPG gas cylinders illegally with an intention to sell the same to the public at higher price and they have stored the cylinders unauthorisedly without taking any precautionary measures.
6
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail.
8. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER Petition is dismissed.
(Sd/-) JUDGE Jm/-