Sri B V Byre Gowda vs State By on 4 April, 2017

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri B V Byre Gowda vs State By on 4 April, 2017

Bench: Rathnakala

                             1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

           DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017

                         BEFORE

         THE HON' BLE MRS JUSTICE RATHNAKALA


           CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2569 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

1.   SRI B.V.BYRE GOWDA
     S/O LATE VENKATARAMANA GOWDA,
     AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
     RESIDING AT NO.171,
     T.G.EXTENTION
     HOSKOTE TOWN
     BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 144

2.   SMT BHANUMATHI
     W/O N.PARTHASARATHY
     AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

3.   SRI N.PARTHASARATHY
     S/O LATE R.NATESHAN
     AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

     PETITIONER NOS.2 AND 3 ARE
     R/AT NO.475, 3RD CROSS
     11TH MAIN, HAL 2ND STAGE
     INDRANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 038.
                                        ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI C.R.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, ADV.,)
                                2




AND:

STATE
BY NANDAGUDI POLICE STATION
REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT
BANGALORE-01
                                            ...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON
ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.109/216 OF NANDAGUDI POLICE
STATION, BENGALURU DIST., WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 5 OF THE EXPLOSIVE ACT, 1884 AND SEC.7
OF EXPLOSIVE RULES, 2008.

    THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent- State.

The respondent-Police registered a case against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in their Crime No.109/2016 on a private complaint referred to the Police for investigation by the Geologist of the Mines and Geology Department, in 3 respect of offences punishable under Section 5 of the Explosive Act, 1884 and Rule 7 of the Explosive Rules, 2008.

2. The allegation is, due to mining activities carried out by these petitioners by blasting, the houses in the neighbouring villages have suffered damages etc.,

3. Sri C.R.Raghavendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are carrying out mining activities for the last 20 years with licence issued by the Deputy Director of the Department of Mines and Geology and the mining activities is in no way connected with the breaches developed to the walls of the houses in the nearby areas.

4. If that is so, the petitioners shall be accommodated to approach the Investigating Officer and convince him about the legality of the activities that they are carrying out. In the given circumstance, there is no impediment to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioners are granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.109/2016 registered by the respondent-Police, subject to following conditions:

(i) Petitioner Nos.1 and 3 shall forthwith appear before the respondent-Investigating Officer. In that event, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to interrogate them.

(ii) In the event of arrest of the petitioners (petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2 and 3) by the respondent-Investigating Officer, they shall be released on bail on executing a self bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety for the likesum.

Sd/-

JUDGE PB

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court