Karnataka High Court
Mr. Bhaskar Bhat vs State By Bommanahalli Police on 7 September, 2018
Author: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
Bench: P.S. Dinesh Kumar
1
CRL.P. NO. 4575/2018
C/W CRL.P. NO. 4880/2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4575/2018
C/W.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4880/2018
IN CRL.P. NO.4575/2018:
BETWEEN:
MR. BHASKAR BHAT
S/O PUTTIGE PADMANABHA BHAT
AGED 63 YEARS
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF
TITAN COMPANY LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.3
SIPCOT INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
HOSUR-635 126 AND HAVING ITS
CORPORATE OFFICE AT
"INTEGRITY", NO.193, VEERASANDRA
ELECTRONIC CITY POST
OFF: HOSUR MAIN ROAD
BENGALURU-560 100 ... PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. C.H. JADHAV, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
BY SHRI. B.M. MOHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY BOMMANAHALLI POLICE
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
2
CRL.P. NO. 4575/2018
C/W CRL.P. NO. 4880/2018
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 001 ... RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI. S. RACHAIAH, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 01.05.2018 PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-A AND SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION OF THE
SAID FIR IN CR.NO.132/2018 BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE
FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 30 OF THE ARMS ACT AND
SECTION 102 AND 41(d) OF CR.P.C. AND CONSEQUENTLY
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CR.NO.132/2018 NOW
PENDING ON THE FILE OF C.M.M, BENGALURU.
IN CRL.P. NO.4880/2018:
BETWEEN:
TITAN COMPANY LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.3
SIPCOT INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
HOSUR-635 126 AND HAVING ITS
CORPORATE OFFICE AT
"INTEGRITY" NO.193, VEERASANDRA
ELECTRONIC CITY POST
OFF: HOSUR MAIN ROAD
BENGALURU-560 100
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
AND SENIOR MANAGER-LEGAL
MR. RAMESH BHAT.K ... PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. C.H. JADHAV, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
BY SHRI. B.M. MOHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY BOMMANAHALLI POLICE
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
3
CRL.P. NO. 4575/2018
C/W CRL.P. NO. 4880/2018
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 001 ... RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI. S. RACHAIAH, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
MODIFY THE ORDER DATED:29.05.2018 ("IMPUGNED
ORDER") PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE COURT
OF C.M.M., BANGALORE IN CR.NO.132/2018 DATED
29.05.2018 AND CONSEQUENTLY GRANT THE ABSOLUTE
CUSTODY OF ITEM NO.1 OF PF.NO.73/2018 viz 147 BOXES IN
10 BAGS CONTANING GOLD, PLATINUM AND DIAMOND
ITEMS ('PETITIONER'S JEWELLERY PRODUCTS') WITH
LIBERTY TO UTILIZE THE SAME IN THE MANNER THE
PETITIONER DESIRES ETC.
THESE CRL.Ps COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
These two petitions are filed by the Titan Company Limited and its Managing Director. They are clubbed together and disposed of by this common order.
2. Crl.P.4575/2018 is filed by the Managing Director of the Titan Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Company'), praying to quash complaint dated 1.5.2018 in FIR No.132/2018 registered by the Bommanahalli Police for offences punishable under 4 CRL.P. NO. 4575/2018 C/W CRL.P. NO. 4880/2018 Section 30 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Sections 102 and 41(d) of Cr.P.C. 1973.
3. Crl.P.4880/2018 is filed by the Company inter alia praying to modify the order dated 29.5.2018 in Crime No.132/2018 pending on the file of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru, whereunder, the learned Magistrate has directed release of property under certain conditions and make the release of goods absolute.
4. Heard Shri C.H. Jadhav, learned senior advocate for the petitioners and Shri S. Rachaiah, learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
5. Company entrusted 147 boxes in 10 bags, which contained Gold, Platinum and Diamond items belonging to the Company to M/s Blue Dart Courier. The goods were being transported in a Cargo Van along with security guards on 30.4.2018. While the vehicle was moving from Bengaluru Airport to Hosur, it was 5 CRL.P. NO. 4575/2018 C/W CRL.P. NO. 4880/2018 intercepted by the Police and a search was conducted. They seized the goods contained in 10 bags under PF No.73/2018. The Company filed an application under Sections 451 and 457 Cr.P.C., seeking custody of the goods. By the order dated 29.5.2018, learned Magistrate released the goods imposing certain conditions.
6. Shri Jadhav, learned senior advocate submits that the goods contained in 10 bags were all legitimate products manufactured by the Company and were being taken to 'work spot' at Hosur. He adverted to the statement of objections filed by the Police Sub-Inspector, Bommnahalli Police Station, Bengaluru to the application filed by the Company seeking release of the goods and pointed out that the Sub-Inspector has categorically stated the police has no objection for release of the goods. He argued that, notwithstanding the police conveying their no objection to release, the learned Magistrate has imposed certain conditions while releasing 6 CRL.P. NO. 4575/2018 C/W CRL.P. NO. 4880/2018 the goods and the same is adversely affecting the business of the Company.
7. On instructions by the police, Shri Rachaiah, learned HCGP submits that the police have no objection for release of the goods to the Company 'absolutely' without any pre-condition. He submits that in this case, charge sheet is being filed only against one security guard by name Thammaiah for violation of Arms Act. Except the said imputation against Thammaiah, Police have no case against the Company and particularly against the goods contained in the Cargo. The aforesaid statement made by the learned HCGP is placed on record.
8. Thus, it is clear though the Cargo was intercepted and goods seized, Police did not find any violation of law by the Company except an offence under the Arms Act by one of the security guard. They have 7 CRL.P. NO. 4575/2018 C/W CRL.P. NO. 4880/2018 specifically conveyed their 'no objection' through the learned HCGP.
9. In the circumstances, there should be no impediment in modifying the order for releasing the goods. So far as the prayer made in Crl.P.No.4575/2018 to quash the complaint dated 1.5.2018 (presented by the Managing Director of the Company) is concerned, suffice it to note that the police have gone on record stating that they propose to file a charge sheet only against one of the security guard for violation of Arms Act and thus there is no allegations against the Company.
10. In the circumstances, I pass the following order:
(i) Crl.P.No.4880/2018 is allowed. Order dated 29.5.2018 passed by the learned Magistrate is modified and the release of goods under PF No.73/2018 to the Company is made absolute and all conditions imposed by the trial court are set at naught; and 8 CRL.P. NO. 4575/2018 C/W CRL.P. NO. 4880/2018
(ii) In view of the categorical submissions made by the police that no proceedings will be initiated against the Company, Crl.P.No.4575/2018 is dismissed as having become infructuous.
11. In view of disposal of Crl.P.4575/2018, IA- 1/2018 for stay does not survive for consideration and the same stands disposed of.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE cp*