Karnataka High Court
Iqabal Aallabaksh Goundi vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 September, 2019
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K. Somashekar
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR
CRL.P NO 101644 OF 2019
BETWEEN
1. IQABAL AALLABAKSH GOUNDI,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS,
R/O BAVANSAVADATTI, TQ:RAIBAG.
(PETITION SOFAR AS PETITIONER NO.1
IS CONCERNED NOT PRESSED)
2. SUNIL RAMANGOUDA PATIL,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS,
R/O JALALPUR, TQ:RAIBAG,
DIST:BELAGAVI.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA MALI, ADV.)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY RAIBAG POLICE STATION,
BELAGAVI DISTRICT
NOW REP BY STATE P.P.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING,
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF THEIR ARREST BY RAIBAG POLICE, IN CONNECTION
WITH RAIBAG P.S. CRIME NO.58/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC COURT, RAIBAG, REGISTERED FOR
:2:
THE OFFENCES P/U/S 420 OF IPC AND SEC. 78(iii) OF
KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, 1963.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in Raibaga P.S. Crime No.58/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC read with Section 78(iii) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the respondent - State.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that based upon the statement of accused Nos.1 and 2 the petitioner No.2 being arraigned as accused No.4. There was no role made by this accused in committing the alleged offence as narrated in the FIR said to be recorded by police and proceeded with the case for investigation, but on 23.03.2019 at around 11.00 am, the PSI of Raibag Police Station has got credible information about the persons being the accused to commit the alleged :3: offence as a Matka business. Therefore, based upon the information secured by the him and informed to his superior and formed a team consisting of staff members so also pancha witnesses and went to the scene of crime at around 11.50 a.m. as where the accused were canvassing that they would pay Rs.80/- for Rs.1/- and encouraging members of general public to participate in the Matka business. Whereas the learned counsel for the petitioner who has taken me through the role made by this accused being arraigned as accused No.4 that the raid was conducted by PSI, who lead the team as around 12.00 noon, but this petitioner being arraigned as accused No.4 was not participating with the other accused so also he was not present at the scene of crime, but only on enquiry by the PSI, who lead the team and also the statements of accused Nos. 1 and 2, this petitioner is being arraigned as accused No.4 in the crime said to be recorded by the police. That there are no prima facie materials against this accused to commit the alleged offence and also participated with other accused, but the police are making hectic efforts to arrest the accused.
:4:
4. However, the petitioner No.2/accused No.4 is an innocent person and he hails from a respectable family and having respect in the eye of society. The accused is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court while granting bail to him. These are all the contention as taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner while seeking for anticipatory bail to the petitioner No.2/accused No.4.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP for the State, who has vehemently contended that, the accused Nos.1 and 2 so also accused No.3 have been apprehended. The accused collecting money from the general public to participate in the Matka business by inducing them for return of Rs.80/- for Rs.1/- invested by them. When the PSI of the Raibag Police Station raided them along with his staff by securing panch witnesses. They apprehended the accused Nos. 1 and 2. Based upon their statements this petitioner No.2/accused No.4 has been lugged into the alleged crime but the amount which has been collected by the accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the Matka business and that amount has been given to this accused being arraigned as accused :5: No.4, but this accused, who is absconding since from the date of the alleged offence itself indicates that there are prima facie materials against petitioner No.2/accused No.4. Therefore, the learned HCGP submitted that the petitioner No.2/accused No.4 does not deserve for anticipatory bail and the petition filed by him be rejected.
6. It is in this context of the contentions taken up by learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.4 and the learned HCGP, who has vehemently contended, which is based upon the complaint filed by the PSI being a responsible person and also law enforcement authority. On 23.03.2019 at around 12.00 noon the PSI of Raibag Police Station, who got credible information about the persons being the accused to commit the alleging offence as a Matka business. Therefore, based upon the information secured by the him and informed to his superior and formed a team consisting of staff members so also pancha witnesses and went to the scene of crime at around 12 noon of the broad day light. On seeking the raiding team lead by the PSI, the accused Nos. 1,2 and 3 inclusive of accused No.4 were took heal from there, but :6: the accused Nos.1 and 2 were apprehended by police and thereafter, apprehended the accused No.3, but this accused No.4/present petitioner escaped from the clutches of the investigating agency. The same has been observed in the bail order passed by the Court below as where in the petition has been moved as under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for seeking anticipatory bail.
7. The entire materials, which are secured by the Investigating Officer and also reflected in the FIR reveals that this petitioner being arraigned as accused No.4 has been lugged into the alleged crime based upon the statements given by the accused Nos.1 and 2 as these accused were found and indicated in the game of chance, which is called as Matka or O.C. business by convincing them and inducing the general public to participate in the Matka business, by canvassing that they would pay Rs.80/- for Rs.1/- . The same has been revealed in the investigation conducted by the PSI of Raibag Police Station. It also reveals that from the accused persons, namely Shabbir Allabaksha Goundi, from his right side pant pocket, found on verification a sum of Rs.50,000/- :7: and from his left side pant pocket a sum of Rs.10,000/- and on his shirt pocket found a sum of Rs.5,000/-. In addition to that, other materials, such as Ball pen, Matka Chits and also pieces of plain sheets, which said to be used by the accused, the same has been seized by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation.
8. Similarly, from the accused Shrimanth Mallappa Mangsuli, Investigating Officer has recovered a sum of Rs.23,000/- from the right side pant pocket, Rs.17,000/- from the pant of left side pocket, Rs.3,000/- found in the shirt pocket, so also a pen, O.C. Chits and pieces of plain sheets.
9. The petitioner being arraigned as accused No.4, where the accused Nos. 1 and 2, having collected the amount in the Mataka business, the same has been given to this petitioner being arraigned as accused No.4, the same has been revealed in the materials available on record. Moreover, this petitioner being arraigned as accused No.4, who has escaped from the clutches of the Investigating Officer, i.e. PSI of the Raibag Police Station, :8: who conducted the raid, apprehended accused Nos. 1 and 2 and on their statements, this petitioner has been lugged into the crime. But the entire material, which reveals as there was a cheating to the general public and canvassing that they will return Rs.80/- on investing of paying of Rs.1/-, in a Matka activities, which has adverse impact on the society. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner No.2/accused No.4 is not deserving for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition filed by the petitioner No.2/accused No.4 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE Vb/-