Karnataka High Court
Mr. Rizwan S/O Nooruddin Bisembar vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 June, 2022
Author: K. Natarajan
Bench: K. Natarajan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101086 OF 2022
BETWEEN
MR. RIZWAN S/O NOORUDDIN BISEMBAR
AGE. 22 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER,
R/O. BISEMBARA,
TALUK- CHATA, DIST. MATHURA,
STATE. UTTAR PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.PRATIK SHIPURKAR S, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH CHIKKODI PS.
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
VII ADDL. DISTRICT COURT,
CHIKKODI,
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT PETITION AND GRANT REGULAR
BAIL TO THE ACCUSED NO.3/SRI.RIZWAN NOORUDDIN
BISEMBARA I.E. THE PETITIONER HEREIN AND PASS AN ORDER
RELEASING HIM FROM JUDICIAL CUSTODY WITH RESPECT TO
CHIKKODI P.S. CRIME NO.216/2021, REGISTERED AGAINST THE
PETITIONER FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 394, 328, 120B OF
IPC.
2
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.', for short) for granting bail in respect of Crime No.216/2021 registered by Chikkodi Police for the offence punishable under Sections 328, 394, 120(B) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for short).
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of one Annu singh, complaint came to be registered on 10.10.2021 alleging that he is working as Manager in R. Sai Logistic Private Limited, Gwaliyar and sent TATA company container Truck bearing No.HR-55 AH-7912 to Madras for transferring tyre's worth Rs.64,00,000/- and he 3 has received information that truck reached Mumbai. Later, he got information that vehicle was parked near Chikkodi. Therefore, he came to Chikkodi and found that tyre's are missing. Therefore, he has filed complaint against the driver of the vehicle. Initially, police registered case against driver of the lorry under section 379 of IPC. Subsequently, during investigation offences punishable under Section 328 and 394 of IPC are inserted. During investigation, it came to know that accused nos.3 and 4 said to have given some sleeping tablets to the driver of the vehicle when he stopped truck for drinking tea and when he became unconscious, accused nos.3 and 4 have unloaded the tyres at unknown place. Thereafter, accused were arrested and detained in judicial custody and tyre's were seized by the Police under panchanama. Police shown this petitioner as accused no.3 in the charge sheet. He has filed bail petition before Addl. Sessions Judge, Belagavi sitting at Chikkodi and the same came to be rejected. Hence, he is before this Court seeking regular bail. 4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is innocent of alleged offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC. Now offence punishable under Section 329 of IPC is leveled against him. Master mind for commission of offence i.e accused No.1 has granted bail by this court in Crl.P.No.100204/2022 on 04.03.2022. Petitioner is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, prays to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP objected the bail petition and contended that accused was main person who gave sleeping tablet to the driver of the lorry and thereafter took lorry and got unloaded the tyres in unknown place. Therefore, a ground of parity cannot be given to this petitioner. He is habitual offender. He is having case for same offences in Rajastan and Maharastra. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.
6. Having heard the arguments of the learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader, perused the records.
5
7. On perusal of the records, admittedly, Section 379 of IPC registered against the driver of the vehicle. Subsequently, accused No.1 gave information regarding robbing the tyres by providing sleeping tablets to the driver and thereafter took the vehicle and unloaded the tyres worth Rs.64,00,000/-. Accused No.1 is the master mind who has already granted bail by co-ordinate bench of this court and another accused executed the work by robbing tyres. All the tyres were recovered and released to the complainant. Petitioner is in custody almost more than 7 months. Investigation completed, charge sheet has already been filed, the only apprehension of the prosecution is that if he is released on bail, he may commit similar offence and abscond. The apprehension of prosecution is safeguarded by imposing stringent conditions, then no prejudice will be caused to the case of the prosecution. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. 6 The trial Court is directed to release the petitioner/accused No.3 on bail in Crime No.216/2021 of Chikkodi Police station subject to the following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakh only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. Out of which one surety from his relative of his native place and another surety is local surety.
ii. The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii. The petitioner shall not indulge in similar offences.
iv. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Police for marking attendance once in a month i.e. on 2nd day of every month until completion of trial.
Sd/-
JUDGE HMB