Karnataka High Court
Bettanayaka @ Sothanayaka vs State Of Karnataka on 20 November, 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5275 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
Bettanayaka @ Sothanayaka,
Aged about 32 years,
S/o Late Javaranasyaka,
R/at Basapura Village,
Saragur Taluk,
Mysuru District - 571 121. ... Petitioner
(By Sri. P.Nataraju, Advocate)
AND:
State of Karnataka,
By Saragur Police Station,
Mysuru District.
Represented by
State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Building,
Bengaluru - 560 001. ... Respondent
(By Sri. Mahesh Shetty, 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.74/2020 of Saragur
Police Station, Mysuru District for the offences
punishable under Section 20(b)(1), 8 of NDPS Act.
-2-
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The present petition is filed by petitioner/accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C to release him on bail in crime No.74/2020 of Saragur Police Station, Mysuru District for the offences punishable under Sections 20(B) (1), (8) of NDPS Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel Sri. P.Nataraju for the petitioner/accused and learned HCGP Sri. Mahesh Shetty for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 26.05.2020 when the complainant was on patrolling duty, he received a credible information at about 10:10 a.m. that in Basapura village, the petitioner/accused has grown ganja plants. Immediately he went to the said place and there he -3- noticed that there petitioner/accused has grown 16 ganja plants and same have been uprooted and mahazar has been drawn and a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for petitioner/accused that petitioner/accused was not present at the time when the alleged incident took place. He has nothing to do with the said growing of the ganja plant. It is his submission that the ganja which has been seized weighed 20 kgs. But the wet ganja plants have been weighed without bifurcating seeds, stems, flowers and fruits etc., It is his submission that the petitioner/accused has nothing to do with the said crime. The ganja which has been seized if it is taken, it is not of a commercial quantity. Petitioner/accused is ready to abide by any of the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties.
-4-
5. Though it is contended by the learned HCGP that from possession commercial quantity of ganja has been seized from backside of house of the accused but on perusal of the records, a complaint has been registered and nowhere quantity of ganja has been stated and subsequently, they made a raid and panchanama has been drawn and the wet ganja plants have been uprooted without separating the stems, seeds, flowers, buds and fruits etc., and the entire quantity of ganja which is seized is in wet condition.
6. Under such circumstances, it is difficult for the Court to prima facie find out at this stage whether the seized ganja is of small quantity or intermediate quantity or commercial quantity. The ganja seized in wet form weighed 20 kgs. That itself shows that it is less than a commercial quantity.
-5-
7. Taking into consideration of the said facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that by imposing some stringent conditions if petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
8. In that light, the petition is allowed. Petitioner-accused is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.74/2020 of Saragur Police Station, Mysuru District for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b) (1), (8) of NDPS Act with following conditions:-
1. Petitioner-accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
2. He shall surrender before the Investigation officer within 20 days from today, failing which, this order automatically stands cancelled.-6-
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
4. He shall mark his attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m., before the concerned police station till the trial is concluded.
5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
6. He shall be regular in attending the trial unless he has been exempted for just cause by the Court.
7. He shall not indulge in similar type of criminal activities and he should not threaten the witnesses.
8. If any one of the conditions is violated, the bail is liable to be cancelled.
Sd/-
JUDGE RKA