Karnataka High Court
Sri Devadas Bhat P vs The State -Through The Sub on 20 December, 2018
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK G.NIJAGANNAVAR
CRL.P.No.7613/2018 & CRL.P.No.8447/2018 C/w
CRL.P.No7689/2018
IN CRL.P.No.7613/2018
BETWEEN:
Sri Devadas Bhat.P
Aged about 55 years
S/o P. Bhaskar Bhat
R/o Door No.5-4-172/5
Shree Prasad, Behind Takshila
Building, Kodialguttu
Ballalbagh, Mangaluru
D.K.District-575 001. ... Petitioner
(By Sri P.P.Hegde, Advocate)
AND:
The State - Through the Sub
Inspector of Police, Kavoor Police Station
Kavoor, Mangaluru, D.K.
(Represented by the State Public
Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka,
Bengaluru-560 001.) ... Respondent
(By Sri K.P.Yoganna, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest
2
in Cr.No.195/2018 of Kavoor P.S., Mangaluru City for the
offence P/U/S 6(A), 3(A), 7 of Essential Commodities Act and
Sec.3,4,5,6 of Karnataka Essential Commodities Order and
Sec.420 of IPC.
IN CRL.P.No.8447/2018
BETWEEN:
Mr.M.V.Rajan Nambiar
S/o Late A.K.Kunhi Raman Nambiar
Aged about 53 years
R/at Door No.3/148, Koppalkadu
Godrej Apartment
Padavu Village
Mangaluru-8. ... Petitioner
(By Sri Bipin Hegde, Advocate)
AND:
State by Kavoor Police Station
Rept. By State Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka
Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondent
(By Sri K.P.Yoganna, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest
in Cr.No.195/2018 of Kavoor P.S., Mangaluru City for the
offence P/U/S 6(A), 3(A), 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1995,
and Sec.3,4,5,6 of Karnataka Essential Commodities (Storage
Accounts Maintenance Value Notifications) Order and Sec.420 of
IPC.
3
IN CRL.P.No.7689/2018
BETWEEN:
Mr. Chandrashekar
S/o Balakrishna
Aged about 37 years
Occ: Lorry Driver
R/at D-No.1-35
Thiruvale House
Ira, Bantwal Taluk-574 323. ... Petitioner
(By Sri Dinesh Kumar K. Rao, Advocate for
Sri Ravindra B. Deshpande, Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka by
Kavoor Police Station
Mangaluru-575 015. ... Respondent
(By Sri K.P.Yoganna, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest
in Cr.No.195/2018 of Kavoor P.S., Mangaluru City for the
offence P/U/S 6(A), 3(A), 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1995,
and Sec.3,4,5,6 of Karnataka Essential Commodities (Storage
Accounts Maintenance Value Notifications) Order and Sec.420 of
IPC.
These Criminal Petitions coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following:
COMMON ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader and perused the records. 4
2. On the basis of the complaint filed by the Food Inspector-Smt. Kasthuri Bhat of Mangaluru, the respondent- police registered the case in Crime No.195/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 6(A), 3(A), 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Karnataka Essential Commodities (Storage Accounts Maintaining Value Notification) Order, 1981 and Section 420 of the IPC.
3. The allegations are that on 07.09.2018 at 8.30 am, the complainant received a credible information that in the godown situated near Manjalpade Kavoor of Mangaluru Taluk, D.K.District, some persons have illegally stored rice and wheat, which are meant for public distribution. On receiving the said information, the complainant went near the godown at Manjapade road. During the inspection, 30 quintals of rice in 60 gunny bags, 65 quintals of rice in 130 white plastic bags, about 9 quintals of wheat in 18 plastic bags bearing seal of Food Corporation of India, 5 empty plastic bags with seal of Midday Meal Scheme were found. In front of the said godown, there were three lorries parked, which were containing 135 quintals of 5 rice in 270 gunny bags, mini lorry loaded with 50 quintals of rice in 100 gunny bags and Mahindra Pick up van containing 10 quintals of rice in 20 gunny bags, having seal of Food Corporation of India. The complainant and her staff seized 290 quintals of rice and 9 quintals of wheat worth Rs.7,97,500/- and Rs.24,750/-.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners in Crl.P.No.7613/2018, submitted that the petitioners is a wholesale dealer in grains, paddy, rice etc. As such he has stored few bags of grains in his godown. On the date of inspection, he has produced the documents in respect of property found in his godown, but, he has been falsely implicated in the case at the instigation of some ill wishers with an intention to tarnish his image. Based on this false complaint, the police are making attempts to arrest the petitioner.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.8447/2018 submitted that the petitioner, who is the Depot Manager had handed over 135 quintal of rice and wheat to the society. Once it is handed over to the society, the role of 6 the depot manager comes to an end. In order to substantiate such contention, the Counsel has produced the receipt for having delivered of 135 quintals of rice and wheat to the society, copy of outward register and the order of the Commissioner directing the Depot Manager to deliver the grains to the society, It is submitted that the bail petition submitted before the Sessions Court was rejected for the reason that the petitioner has colluded with others in creation of bill for the purpose of transporting rice in KFCS godown. The police official is making an attempt to arrest the petitioners.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.7689/2018 submitted that the lorry driver has not played any vital role in illegal transportation of the grains meant for public distribution. He has simply carried out the instructions of the employer. As such, he is not liable for the commission of the offences alleged against him. In the event of his arrest and detention, he will be put to hardship.
7. The learned HCGP has orally opposed the bail petition and submitted that there are no valid grounds for 7 granting bail as there is a prima-facie case against these petitioner.
8. The main contention of the petitioner is that on the date of the raid, the inspection was conducted by the complainant/Food Inspector, three lorries were standing on the road near the godown. According to the petitioners in Crl.P.No.7613/2018, they were not found in the premises of the godown and he was nowhere connected with the said vehicles.
9. As could be seen from the records, all the food grains along with the three vehicles and also the commodities found in the godown have been seized through Mahazar. At this stage, no grounds are made out for custodial interrogation. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
10. In a decision in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State Maharashtra reported in 2011 (1) SCC 694, Hon'ble Supreme Court that has held no inflexible guidelines or can be provided for grant or refusal of Anticipatory Bail. While 8 considering the ground for grant of bail, the balance has to be struck between two factors namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and they should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused. The arrest should be the last option and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting of the accused imperative in the facts and circumstances of that case.
11. The submission made by the counsel and the grounds urged, goes to prove the apprehension of the petitioners regarding arrest and detention as such these petitions deserves to be allowed subject to condition:
ORDER The criminal petitions are allowed. The petitioners are directed to appear before the concerned officer within ten days from the date of receipt of copy of this bail order. On their appearance, the I.O. shall conduct interrogation. After completion of the interrogation, the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:- 9
(i) The petitioners shall furnish a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court;
(ii) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and co-operate with the investigation;
(iii) They shall mark their attendance on every Monday before the concerned police station till filing of the charge-sheet; and
(iv) They shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses.
SD/-
JUDGE VBS/HA