Karnataka High Court
Raghupathi A vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 January, 2023
-1-
CRL.P No. 11859 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11859 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. RAGHUPATHI A,
S/O ANNIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT NO.16A,
MUNESHWARA LAYOUT,
DEVI NAGAR BANGALORE NORTH,
BANGALORE - 560 094.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MOHAN KUMAR H G., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR
POLICE STATION,
Digitally signed by REPRESENTED BY
MOHANKUMAR M
Location: High STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
Court Of
Karnataka HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.K.RAHUL RAI, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.39/2022 OF
-2-
CRL.P No. 11859 of 2022
KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/S 22(C), 27(A) OF NDPS ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-33)
BANGALORE IN SPL.C.NO.2070/2022.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner-accused No.3 is before this Court seeking grant of bail in Crime No.39/2022 of Kempegowda Nagar Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 22(c) and 27(A) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'NDPS Act'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant-Sri.Abraham J.M.
2. Heard Sri.Mohan Kumar H.G., learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.Rahul Rai, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials placed on record.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.3. He is innocent and has not committed any offences as alleged. He has been falsely -3- CRL.P No. 11859 of 2022 implicated in the matter without any basis. He was apprehended on 29.03.2022 and since then he is in judicial custody. It is submitted that the petitioner was only the rider of the motorcycle in which accused No.4 was on pillion. The allegation is that about 1.100 kg of ganja was seized from the motorcycle in which accused Nos.3 and 4 were proceeding. Petitioner being the rider of the motorcycle was never in possession of the contraband.
He further submitted that in the meantime, accused Nos.1 and 2 were also apprehended. It is also stated that they were transporting the commercial quantity of MDMA along with LSD strips. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed. Accused No.1 is already released on bail. The petitioner is also entitled for benefit of parity. He is not having any criminal antecedents. Under such circumstances, detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to pre-trial punishment. The petitioner is the permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title to the petition and is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition. -4- CRL.P No. 11859 of 2022
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that the serious allegations are made against the petitioner for having committed the offence. The petitioner along with accused No.4 was in possession of 1,100 kg of ganja. In the meantime, accused Nos.1 and 2 were in possession of commercial quantity of MDMA and LSD strips. After investigation, the charge sheet is filed. Looking to the nature and seriousness of the allegations, if the petitioner is granted bail, he may never turn up before the Investigating Officer and he may abscond or may commit similar offences, threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
5. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?"-5-
CRL.P No. 11859 of 2022
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following:
REASONS
6. The charge sheet filed against the petitioner discloses that the petitioner being accused No.3, was riding the motorcycle and accused No.4 was on pillion and 1.100 kg of ganja was found in their custody. In the meantime, accused No.1 was riding another motorcycle and accused No.2 was on pillion and they were in possession of commercial quantity of MDMA and LSD strips.
7. Admittedly, accused No.1 is already enlarged on bail. Therefore, I do not find any reasons to reject the bail petition filed by the petitioner as the allegation against accused No.3 is that he was in possession of only intermediary quantity of ganja along with accused No.4. Under such circumstances, detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to infringement of his right to life and liberty. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that -6- CRL.P No. 11859 of 2022 the petitioner may abscond or may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses.
8. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.39/2022 of Kempegowda Nagar Police Station, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:
a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.
b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.-7- CRL.P No. 11859 of 2022
If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.
On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE MKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40