Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 11, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Vsl Mining Company Ltd. vs The State By C.B.I. on 14 December, 2015

Author: A.V.Chandrashekara

Bench: A.V.Chandrashekara

                              1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015

                       BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA

           CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6430 OF 2015


BETWEEN :

1.    M/S VSL MINING COMPANY LTD
      ASHOK COLONY, SANDUR
      BELLARY DISTRICT
      KARNATAKA
      REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTORS
      PETITIONERS NO. 2 & 3

2.    ANIL H LAD
      AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
      S/O LATE HEEROJI LAD

3.    AARTI ANIL LAD
      AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
      W/O ANIL H LAD

      BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
      NO.12, DOLLARS COLONY
      1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS
      RMV 2ND STAGE
      BANGALORE - 560 094
                                          ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. M.T. NANAIAH, SR. COUNSEL, FOR
    SRI. SHANKARAPPA, ADVOCATE)
                                  2




AND :

THE STATE BY C.B.I.
GANGANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 003
                                      ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. C.H. JADHAV, SR. COUNSEL, FOR
    M/S. JADHAV ASSOCIATES)

      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
438 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON
BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN RC.10/E/2013-
CBI/EOW/CHENNAI OF CBI:EOW:CHENNAI P.S., FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 120(B), 420, 379, 411, 427, 447 OF IPC
AND SEC.13(2) R/W 13(1)(d) OF P.C. ACT AND SEC. 21 R/W
4(1), 4(1)(A) AND 23 OF MMDR ACT AND SEC. 24 OF
KARNATAKA FOREST ACT.

    THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

                         ORDER

Heard the learned Senior counsel Sri. M.T. Nanaiah for the petitioners and Sri. C.H. Jadhav, learned Senior Counsel representing respondent C.B.I.

2. Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in a criminal case bearing RC.10/E/2013-CBI/EOW/Chennai, on the file of the Chennai Police Station. A case is registered for the offences under Sections 120(B), 420, 379, 411, 427, 447 OF 3 IPC AND SEC.13(2) R/W 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act and Sec. 21 r/w 4(1), 4(1)(A) and 23 of MMDR Act and Sec. 24 of KARNATAKA FOREST ACT. Petitioners are apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent Police. Hence Anticipatory bail application is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

3. The case on hand relates to conspiracy hatched and cheating done and illegally excavating iron ore and receiving stolen property and committing criminal misconduct by illegally mining and transporting iron ore in land belonging to the Government in various places.

4. Learned Special Pubic Prosecutor, has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that these petitioners were stealing the natural resources in the form of iron Ore by excavation without valid permits after trespassing the forest area belonging to the Government. If they are released on anticipatory they are likely to interfere with the prosecution witnesses. A detailed objection is filed apart from furnishing a copy of the reply given by C.B.I through e-mail. 4 Hence, he has requested this court to dismiss the bail application.

5. Perused the records.

6. As could be seen from the records, this is the second case registered against these petitioners for similar offences and they are already released on bail. Learned Senior Counsel submits that C.B.I. likely to submit a final report at the earliest as investigation has coming to an end. It is also mentioned in the said letter that final report would be submitted in the coming week. Petitioners are a permanent residents Dollars Colony, Bengaluru having deep roots in the community. Now major portion of the investigation is already over and final report would be submitted within a week. They are already on bail in respect of similar case registered against them Taking into consideration, the same this Court is of the opinion that petitioners are to be released on anticipatory bail. Thus, the apprehension of learned Special Public Prosecutor 5 representing C.B.I. would be suitably met with by imposing proper conditions. Accordingly the following:

ORDER
1. Anticipatory Bail application is allowed.

Petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent Police, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only)each with one surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

2. Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 31.12.2015 and Co-operate with the further investigation.

3. Petitioners shall not hold out threats to the prosecution witnesses and shall not try to lure them in any manner.

4. Petitioners shall attend the court on all dates of hearing, without fail, except under unavoidable circumstances, provided charge sheet is filed against them.

5. Petitioners shall not involve themselves in any kind of criminal activities.

6

6. Petitioners shall mark their attendance once in a month without fail on every Second Wednesday between 9.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m., before the concerned Police Station, till the submission of the final report.

If petitioners violate any one of the above conditions, prosecution will be at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail from the Concerned Sessions Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE HR