Siddappa S/O Manikappa Mudda vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 2181 Kant

                                  1




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                    DHARWAD BENCH

          DATED THIS THE 10 T H DAY OF JUNE, 2021
                              BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.100672/2021


   BETWEEN:

   Siddappa S/o. Manikappa Mudda,
   Age 55 ye ars, Occ: Agriculture ,
   R/o. Khandre Galli, Bgakju Gunj,
   Bhalki, D ist. Bidar - 585401

                                                  ...Petitio ner
   (Sri. K .M.Shiralli, Advocate)

   AND:

   The State of Karnataka,
   Through P.I., Ashoknagar P.S., Hubli,
   R/by State Public Prosecutor,
   High Court of Karnataka,
   Bench Dharwad - 580007.

                                                ... Respondent
   (By S ri.Ramesh B. Chigari, HCGP)

         This criminal pe titio n is filed under section 438
   of  Cr.P.C.,     see king  anticipato ry    bail  in   Crime
   No.24/2019 of Ashok N agar Po lice Statio n, Hubballi,
   and to re le ase the petitione r on bail in the e vent of his
   arrest.

         This criminal petition co ming on fo r orders this
   day, the court made the fo llowing:
                                 2




                           ORDER

This petition is filed by the accused under

Section 438 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity)

seeking bail in Crime No.24/2019 of Ashok Nagar

Police Station, registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter

referred to as the 'NDPS Act', for brevity).

2. The case of the prosecution is that, one Sri.

H.K.Pathan, ACP, North Division, Hubballi City has

filed a complaint alleging that when he and his

colleagues were on patrolling duty, he received a

credible information that one person is transporting

Ganja illegally in a white colour car bearing

registration No.KA 56/2670 from Bidar to Karwar via

Hubballi. Further he also received the information that

the said car is passing through Hubballi in between

12.30 p.m. to 1.30 p.m. near Kusugal village on APMC

Road. A complaint came to be registered in Crime

No.24/2019 of Ashok Nagar Police Station, Hubballi,

for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C)

of NDPS Act, 1985. The complainant along with his

staff and panchas went to Gopanakoppa Unkal Road,

near Venkateshwar Temple and kept a watch at about

1.15 p.m., a car bearing registration No.KA 56/2670

came from Gopankoppa village and they stopped the

vehicle and one Siddram @ Sunil S/o. Vishwanath

Gunde (accused No.1) was in the car. They searched

the car and found ganja about 50 kg. and seized the

same under a mahazar. On enquiry Siddaram @ Sunil

Gunde (accused No.1) informed them that Siddappa

Mudda (accused No.2) petitioner herein known to him

and he has introduced him one Vikram Rathod

(accused No.3) of Kaplapur thanda. The said Vikram

Rathod (accused No.3) was dealing with selling of

ganja by bringing it from Orissa State. He further

informed the raiding party that he purchased the said

ganja from Vikram Rathod (accused No.3) by paying

him Rs.7,000/- per k.g. The police arrested Siddaram

@ Sunil (accused No.1) and produced him before the

Court. During the course of investigation, the police

arrested accused No.3 - Vikram Rathod and produced

him before the Court. After investigation, charge-

sheet has been filed arraying the present petitioner as

accused No.2 in the charge-sheet. The petitioner

apprehending his arrest has filed Criminal

Miscellaneous No.297/2020 and the same came to be

rejected by III Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Dharwad by order dated 09.07.2020. Therefore, the

petitioner is before this Court, seeking anticipatory

bail.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner and the learned High Court Government

Pleader for the respondent-State.

4. It would be the contention of the petitioner

that, the petitioner is innocent and he has not

committed any offences alleged and he has been

falsely implicated in the case. The materials placed by

the prosecution are not sufficient to hold that the

petitioner has committed any offence as alleged. The

accusations leveled against the petitioner is that, he is

acquainted with the accused No.3 who sold ganja to

accused No.1. The investigation is over and charge-

sheet has been filed and therefore, the petitioner is

not required for any custodial interrogation. With

these, he prayed to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader contends that, the offence alleged against the

petitioner is a serious offence involving commercial

quantity of ganja and it affects the society at large.

The petitioner is a person acquainted with the accused

No.3 who sold 50 k.g. of ganja to accused No.1 and

therefore, the petitioner is required for interrogation.

He contends that another case for a similar offence

has been registered against the petitioner in Crime

No.83/2019 of Khatakchincholi Police Station. If the

petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he will tamper

the prosecution witness and flee from justice. With

this, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. Having regard to the submission made by

the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone

through the charge sheet records.

7. In Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs.

State of Maharashtra reported in AIR 2011 SC

312, the Hon'ble Apex Court after analyzing

various previous judgment and guidelines, has

enumerated the following factors and

parameters that can be taken into

consideration by Courts while dealing with the

anticipatory bail:

(i) The nature and gravity of the accusatio n and the exact role o f the accused must be pro perly comprehended before arrest is made ;

(ii) The ante cedents of the applicant including the fact as to whethe r the accused has previously undergo ne imprisonment on conviction by a Court in re spect of any cognizable offence;

(iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice;

(iv) The possibility of the accused's like lihoo d to repe at similar or o ther offence s;

(v) Where the accusatio ns have be en made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him o r her;

(vi) Impact of grant of anticipato ry bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a ve ry large number of peo ple;

(vii) The Courts must evaluate the e ntire available material against the accuse d very carefully. T he Court must also clearly comprehe nd the e xact role of the accused in the case. T he cases in which the accuse d is implicated with the help of Sectio ns 34 and 149 o f the Penal Co de, 1860, the Court should conside r with e ve n gre ate r care and caution because over- implication in the cases is a matter of common knowle dge and co ncern;

(viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two facto rs, namely, no pre judice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation, and there sho uld be preve ntion of harassment, humiliatio n

and unjustifie d detentio n of the accused;

  (ix)    The     Court      to        conside r        reasonable
          apprehension            of     tampering           of    the

witness or appre hension of thre at to the complainant;

  (x)     Frivo lity in prosecutio n sho uld always
          be    considered         and       it    is    only      the
          element       of   genuineness                that      shall

have to be co nsidered in the matte r of grant of bail, and in the event of there being som e doubt as to the genuineness o f the prosecutio n, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitle d to an order o f bail.

8. During raid on 10.07.2019, the

complainant recovered 50 k.g. ganja from the dicky of

the car of accused No.1. The accusations leveled

against the petitioner/accused No.2 is that, he is

acquainted with the accused No.3 who sold 50 k.g. of

ganja to accused No.1. Therefore, the accusations

against the accused No.2/petitioner herein is that, he

is acquainted with accused No.3. Except that, there

are no other allegations against the petitioner/accused

No.2. As the charge-sheet has been filed, the

petitioner is not required for any custodial

interrogation. The Special Court has rejected the bail

application of the petitioner on the ground that, there

was another crime registered in Crime No.83/2019 of

Khatakchincholi P.S. for similar offence. Learned

counsel for the petitioner submits that, subsequent to

this incident which took place on 10.07.2019,

Khatakchincholi police have registered the said Crime

No.83/2019 on 12.07.2019 against this petitioner and

accused No.3. Learned counsel further submits that,

the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail in the

said case in Criminal Miscellaneous No.509/2020 by

the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bidar, by

order dated 08.10.2020. As the petitioner has

undertaken to face the trial, his prayer for anticipatory

bail can be considered by imposing stringent

conditions. The apprehension of the prosecution is

that, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he

will threaten the complainant and other prosecution

witnesses. The said objection may be set right by

imposing stringent conditions.

9. In the facts and circumstances of the case

and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the

view that there are valid grounds for grant of

anticipatory bail subject to certain terms and

conditions. Hence, I pass the following:

ORDER

Criminal petition filed under Section 438 of

Cr.P.C. is allowed. In the event of arrest,

petitioner/accused No.2 is ordered to be released on

bail in connection with Crime No.24/2019 of Ashok

Nagar Police Station with the following conditions:

i. Petitioner/accused No.2 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

ii. Petitioner/accused No.2 shall appear before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad in Special NDPS CC No.6/2020, within one month and execute personal bond.

iii. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall co-

operate with the Investigation and make himself available for investigation, if his presence is required for any further investigation.

iv. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer.

v. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing, unless exempted and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.

Sd/-

JUDGE

* S vh / -