Karnataka High Court
Mohammad Ali. D vs State Of Karnataka on 17 June, 2021
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17 T H DAY OF JUNE 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.101061 OF 2021
BETWEEN
MOHAMMAD ALI. D
@ MAHAMJMADALLI DODDAHSANSAB YELIGAR
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
OCC. CABLE NET WORK BUSINESS,
R/O YAMANUR,
TALUK NAVALGUN D
DIST DHARWAD-582208
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.SANTOS H B MANE, ADV.)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH HUBBA LLI RURA L POLICE
REPRES ENTED BY
SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENCH AT DHARW AD
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.RAMESH B. CHIGARI , HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF
CR.P.C., PRAYIN G TO DIRECT THE RES PONDEN T
POLI CE TO RELEA SE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF HIS A RREST IN CONNECTION WITH THE
CRIME NO.102/ 2021 REGISTERED BY THE HUBBALLI
RURAL POLICE FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UND ER SECTIONS 379, 120B I PC AN D
SEC.37, 51, 63, 65 AND 65A OF THE COPY RIGHTS ACT
OF 1957 AND SEC.66C OF THE INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACT , 2000.
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 438 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking bail in Crime No.102/2021 of Hubballi Rural Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 120B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity) and Sections 37, 51, 63, 65 and 65A of the Copy rights Act of 1957 and Section 66C of the Information technology Act, 2000.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that one Sri.Arun Amarnath Sharma, power of attorney holder of Mr.Mohit Bajaj who is authorized representative of company named Star India Pvt. Ltd. A company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The 3 complainant company owns, manages, controls and broadcasts several pay channels in India. It is stated in the complaint that the complainant company involved in entering into contracts with various multi system Operators, Local Cable operators and other distribution platforms for the right to access broadcast and retransmit the STAR Channels on Licenses an integrated Digital Satellite Receiver cum Decoder Box (DCRs) to decrypt or unscramble the signals and thereafter relay them for viewing by their subscribers. The Company came to know that the petitioner and others unknown persons have indulged in committing the offence of theft by infringing their copy rights by stealing the feed of Star Channels by using consumer Set Top Box without the license or the consent of the company. They further stated that they have the electronic evidence to establish that the pirating network is transmitting/redistributing or re- broadcasting Star Channels illegally without any license 4 by illegally stealing the feed of the Star Channel to his cable subscribers at Ingalahalli village which is causing loss of revenue to the company and as such the complaint is filed against the petitioner/accused and Petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.1 in the FIR filed. Crl.Misc.No.452/2021 is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected by I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, sitting at Hubballi by order dated 26.05.2021. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking anticipatory bail.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 that the petitioner is innocent and not committed nay offence as alleged and he has been falsely implicated in the case. 5 Complainant has not stated to which customer the petitioner is stated to be retransmitted the Star channels in Inglahalli village. He further contended that the offence alleged against the petitioner is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and maximum punishment provided for the said offence is 3 years. The petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation and ready to offer surety and ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court. With these, he prayed for allowing the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 has re-transmitted the paid Star Channels to his customers at Inglahalli village without obtaining any license from the complainant-Company and it has caused loss to the complainant company. If the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, petitioner/accused No.1 will hamper 6 investigation and tamper prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.
6. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the records.
7. The accusation leveled against the petitioner is that he re-transmitted the paid Star Channels to his customers at Inglahalli village without obtaining any license from the complainant-Company and the same can be ascertained only after submission of final report. As the petitioner has undertaken to co-operate in the investigation and abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court, his prayer for anticipatory bail can be considered. The main objection of the prosecution is that if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he will hamper the investigation and 7 tamper prosecution witnesses can be met with by imposing suitable conditions.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for grant of anticipatory bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER Criminal petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. In the event of arrest, petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in connection with Crime No.102/2021 of Hubballi Rural Police Station with the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Jurisdictional Court.8
ii. The petitioner shall voluntarily surrender before the Investigating officer/Jurisdictional Court within a month and execute personal bond and furnish surety.
iii. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required.
iv. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer.
v. The petitioner shall not obstruct or hamper the Police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet be collected by the Police.
Sd/-
JUDGE HMB