Karnataka High Court
Sri. Anand Patil S/O S.S. Patil vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 December, 2021
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7 T H DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.102274/2021
BETWEEN:
Sri. Anand Patil S/o. S. S.Patil
Age: 45 years, Occ: Business
Owner of Sri. Venkateshwara Hardware Shop
R/o. Shree Lakshmi Venkateshwara Nilaya
Main Road, Ballari 583 101.
...PETITIONER
(By Sri.Srinand A. Pachhapure, Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka
Through Gandhinagar Police Station
Now Rep. by State Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka Dharwad
Bench at Dharwad 580 011
... RESPONDENT
(By Sri. Ramesh B. Chigari, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner in Crime No.89/2021
registered for the offences punishable under Section
4(2)(a), 4(2)(e), 4(2)(h) and 5(1) of the Karnataka
Epidemic Diseases Act, 2020, by the Gandhinagar Police
Station, pending on the file of Court of Principal Civil Judge
(Jr.Dn.) & JMFC, Ballari in C.C.No.2166/2021.
2
This criminal petition coming on for orders this day,
the Court made the following:
ORDER
The sole accused has filed this petition under Section 438 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.89/2021 of Gandhinagar Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 4(2)(a), 4(2)(e), 4(2)(h) and 5(1) of the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases Act, 2020.
2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 17.06.2021 at about 2.00 pm, the complainant and others were on beat rounds due to Covid-19 lockdown, at Bandhobasth near Royal Circle at about 2.30 pm, they noticed the shop Sree Venkateshwara Hardware 3 was opened and customers were present without maintaining social distance. Therefore, as the owner of the shop was doing business during the lockdown period without taking precautionary measures, a complaint came to be filed against him for the aforesaid offences. The police after investigation filed charge sheet against him for the aforesaid offences and case is registered in C.C.No.2166/2021 and the jurisdictional Court issued summons to the petitioner. The petitioner appeared through his counsel on 28.10.2021 and his presence was exempted. Since the alleged offences are non-bailable in nature, the petitioner has reasonable apprehension that the respondent- police may arrest him and therefore he approached the Sessions Court seeking anticipatory bail in Crl.Misc.No.676/2021 4 before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ballari and the same came to be rejected by the order dated 06.11.2021. 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. It would be the contention of the leaned counsel for the petitioner that, the petitioner is innocent, not committed any offence as alleged and has been falsely implicated in the case. He would further contend that the offences alleged against the petitioner are non-bailable and therefore, the petitioner apprehends that the jurisdictional Court will take him to judicial custody. It is 5 his further submission that the petitioner is a reputed businessman and if he is remanded to judicial custody, it will affect his reputation. With this he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that, the offence alleged against the petitioner is non- bailable and the punishment provided for the same may extend to five years and with fine. The charge sheet filed shows prima facie case against the petitioner. If the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he will 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 6 Pleader, this Court has gone through the FIR, complaint and charge sheet records.
7. The accusation leveled against the petitioner is that, he had opened the hardware shop wherein customers were present without maintaining social distance and he was doing business during lockdown period without taking precautionary measures. After filing the charge sheet, summons came to be issued to the petitioner. The petitioner appeared through his counsel on 28.10.2021 and his presence was exempted. The petitioner has an apprehension of his taking into judicial custody as one of the offence is non-bailable and punishment for the same may extent to five years. The said apprehension of the petitioner was a reasonable apprehension. Therefore the petitioner is entitled for grant of anticipatory 7 bail with stringent conditions. In the result, the following:
ORDER Criminal petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. In the event of arrest, petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on bail in connection with Crime No.89/2021 of Gandhinagar Police Station subject to the following conditions:
i. The 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 jurisdictional Court.
ii. The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii. The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court within fifteen days from this day.8
iv. The petitioner shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing unless exempted and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE g ab