Karnataka High Court
Shabhoddin S/O Syed Wali And Anr vs The State Of Karnataka Through on 3 November, 2016
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana
Bench: S.N.Satyanarayana
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201153/2016
Between
1. Shabhoddin S/o Syed Wali
Age: 28 years, Occ: Driver
R/o Bheem Nagar, Bhalki
Dist. Bidar
2. Kiran @ Kinya S/o Ramlu Idgar
Age: 19 years, Occ: Labour
R/o New Masoom Pasha Colony
Bhalki, Dist. Bidar
... Petitioners
(By Sri Sharanabasappa K. Babshetty, Advocate)
And
The State of Karnataka
Through Gandhi Gunj Police Station and
Addl. State Public Prosecutor
High Court, Kalaburagi Bench
... Respondent
(By Sri P.S.Patil, HCGP)
This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.
P.C. praying to release the petitioner/accused No. 3 and 4 on
bail, in crime No. 118/2016 of Gandhi Gunj Police Station,
Bidar, in the interest of justice and equity. Which is
2
registered for the offences punishable under Section 328 of
IPC, punishable under Section 20-B of Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act and punishable under Section
27 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act.
This petition is coming on for orders this day, the
Court made the following:-
ORDER
Accused Nos.3 and 4 in Crime No.118/2016 registered with Gandhi Gunj police, Bidar have come up in this petition seeking their enlargement on bail.
2. The documents appended to this petition would indicate that complaint is registered on 23.08.2016 at about 6.00 p.m. by the Police Sub- inspector of Gandhi Gunj police station against four accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 328 of IPC, Section 20-B of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 and Section 27 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. FIR registered in Crime No.118/2016 would disclose that Gandhi Gunj police on credible information laid track to apprehend accused Nos.1 to 4 in the said complaint, which was filed to the effect that psychotropic drugs 3 were being transported to a place at Irani Galli at Bidar- Chidri in a Mahindra Wagan Car bearing No.AP-09/BK- 1947.
3. It is stated that on the very same day i.e. on 23.08.2016 at about 6.00 p.m. accused Nos.1 to 4 in the said complaint came to that place in the said car along with 8,796 of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus tablets and Nitravet-10 tablet, 302 Corex Syrup bottles and 20 kg ganja was seized from the said vehicle in which accused Nos.1 to 4 were travelling. It is stated that since from 23.08.2016 accused Nos.1 to 4 are in custody. In the mean while, Criminal Misc.No.788/2016 was filed by petitioners herein before the Sessions Court, Bidar seeking their enlargement on bail on the premise that they are totally innocent of the offence alleged against them. Except they were in the vehicle, they had nothing else to do with the seized psychotropic drugs and there 4 are no accusations or allegations to connect them directly to the offence alleged in the said crime.
4. However, learned Government Pleader by opposing bail would bring to the notice of this Court that accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.118/2016 together constituted an unlawful group which was formed with the sole intention to peddle (dealing) the aforesaid substance in Irani Galli of Bidar. As such accused Nos.1 to 4 are all part of organized crime. Therefore, they should not be enlarged on bail.
5. After hearing learned counsel appearing for petitioners and as well as learned Government Pleader, on going through contents of complaint and also reasons furnished in Crl.Misc.No.788/2016 for rejection of bail for these two petitioners, this Court feel that considering the nature of offence alleged against them and also the fact that they were travelling in the vehicle along with said drugs and substance which was seized 5 in the said proceeding. It is not possible to believe that there is no role of petitioners herein with the alleged offence referred in Crime No.118/2016.
6. In any event, whether they are involved or not in the said crime is the matter, which is required to be established by the prosecution in their investigation, which is yet to be concluded. Even before investigation is concluded, enlarging these petitioners on bail would not be in the interest of prosecution. Accordingly, present petition is rejected reserving liberty to them to approach the jurisdictional Court to seek their enlargement on bail after charge sheet is filed against them. In such event, Court below shall consider the same on the basis of merits of the case as well as their involvement if any in the said offence.
Sd/-
JUDGE Srt Ct: MHS