G N Vishwanatha vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 November, 2017

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

G N Vishwanatha vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 November, 2017

Bench: R.B Budihal

                             1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEBMER 2017

                       BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.

          CRIMINAL PETITION No.7368/2017


BETWEEN:

1.    G N Vishwanatha
      S/o G K Gajendra
      Aged about 34 years

2.    Gopalashetty
      S/o Late Bundashetty
      Aged about 46 years

3.    Siddamma
      D/o Late Bundashetty
      Aged about 37 years

4.    Nagamma
      D/o Late Bundashetty
      Aged about 37 years

5.    Basamma
      W/o Late Bundashetty
      Aged about 65 years

All are R/at Kuthanuru Village
Gundlupet Taluk.                    ..PETITIONERS

(By Sri M Sharass Chandra, Adv.)
                              2


AND:

The State of Karnataka
Through Gundlupet Police Station
Gundlupet Taluk
Chamarajanagar District-571 111.          .. RESPONDENT

(By Sri K Nageshwarappa, HCGP)

       This criminal petition is filed under Section under
Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the
petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in
Cr.No.45/2017 of Gundlupete P.S., Chamarajanagara for
the offences punishable under Sections 4(1), 4(1A) and
21(1) of Mines and Minerals Regulation of Development
Act and Section 9B(2) of Explosive Act, 1884.

      This petition coming on for Orders this day, the
Court made the following:

                         ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking a direction to the respondent police that in the event of their arrest, they be released on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1), 4(1A) and 21(1) of Mines and Minerals Regulation of Development Act and Section 9B(2) of Explosive Act, 1884, registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.45/2017.

2. The allegation of the complainant in the complaint is that the accused persons were excavating mines and minerals without any licence. So mahazar was drawn in this regard. The complainant has seized one jock hammer, ½ kg small wire, one piece of stone and two rubber swings in the presence of panchas.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners-accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

4. It is the contention of the petitioners that the names of the petitioners were not found in the complaint as well as in FIR. FIR came to be registered against accused No.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that after arrest of accused No.1 and as per his submission, the petitioners were arrayed as the accused persons. It is also his submission that accused No.1 has already been granted bail by the order of the learned Magistrate. The petitioners have contended that they are not involved in commission of the alleged offence. The 4 petitioners have contended that they are ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. The alleged offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate and are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Since the main accused No.1 is already released on bail, the petitioners can also be released on bail.

5. Therefore, the petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4(1), 4(1A) and 21(1) of Mines and Minerals Regulation of Development Act and Section 9B(2) of Explosive Act, 1884, registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.45/2017, subject to the following conditions:

i. Each petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and have to furnish one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.

ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.

iii. Petitioners shall make themselves available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when called for and to cooperate with the further investigation.

iv. Petitioners shall appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute the personal bond and the surety bond.

Sd/-

JUDGE Cs/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court