High Court Karnataka High Court

Gurunath vs State Of Karnataka on 22 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Gurunath vs State Of Karnataka on 22 February, 2010
Author: A.S.Pachhapure
IN THE HIGH COURT op' KARNATAKA 

CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD_...._i44'   

DATED THIS THE 22% DAY OF FEBRU'A:§Y,jVi2oi1o *  _  

BEFo1j-zE""'-« _ V
THE HONBLE MR.JUsT1ci%;A::sif'i5Ac1+:--HAPuR¢"'--.Ti:' "
Crl.P.      i

Between:

Gurunath, '  '   

S/oYa11appa Singanahafii,  L

Aged 30 years;gO_cc: Pi*iVate. i  

R/0 Mang3>i1E§T;'3oColGny.€  

Mantur    __     T .

Dist:  .      Petitioner

(By   
Andi}, " V'  V' i
The State of 'I{ari1atai<é1*; 

Rep"£d_.. By its SPF,
E'-ligh: Court Building;

,  ., , V Dhafzmdi} 
'  '('Excis4e'P_;SiDharwad)  Respondent

. '-- {By s"ri.iP';oj--3HAiT:= oozkhindi, HCGP)

.'v.V'_'iii*his Cr1.P is filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C.

 A' praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Sessions Case
"  = N958/2OO9~1O Excise P.S. Dharwad, and etc.

This Cr1.P coming on for orders this day, the Court

 made the following-



Ix.)

ORDER

The petition is med seeking antic.ip’ato_r”f? peg:

apprehending arrest for the offenpggjg-.eV.

under sections 11. 13,

Karnataka Excise Act,

2. The faC,’1?$ reIev–an’ft–.fo»rA.the’purpose of this
Petition are as ht V’ d.

The _ e3§ei.se V” credible information
regardingj”‘tI1Vé%a;£__po-sses~si_o:fja er the illicit liquor in Plot
Colony and after visiting the
plaee from the place and

they chased ‘iévere not able to apprehend him.

._”f31ae;;odV:u*ent to”‘nis”house and seized 35 Ltrs of illicit

V each plastic cans totally measuring about

In the circumstances, they seized the

samvefiunder a mahazar and registered a complaint

, the petitioner for the aforesaid offences.

v<e

3. The petitioner submits that he is innocent
person and he has not committed any offencegarxd as

he is arrayed as an accused in earlier cas’e;”‘he._ihas

been falsely involved in this case as We1i’;A«i:_:i’Soea:lVsoi
the submission that the petitioner is i
arrest in respect of non~baiIabie offienceiiagndvthatéiheiiisu

ready and Wiiling to abiderby the ifihe

reieased on bai1..”‘i={e a_l’so”un;de”rt_akesito attend and
the court as and when upon. On these

grounds heis;ee’ks :1°._or 2

:2; i Government Advocate fiied his

statement” of ‘v.ob_i.ecti’ons and submits that there is

..faciei'”rn–aterial against the petitioner for the

V registered and that the petitioner has been
i’ such crime eariier and a crime in
C.Ch.’_1\1Iov.2868/ 2009 is pending in the court. In the

V’ r circumstances, it is his submission that the petitioner

has not made out any such ground to grant baii. K

5. I have heard the learned Counsel jfo-r the

petitioner and the learned I-ICGP.

6. The point that ari_ses,_for

is “whether the petitioner is”‘1.en:titi*ed

bail sought for?”

7. As be i i _ the V stigation
report, it is Apstatedpwltlhaltp escaped from
the place” of his house
plastic i§;i§put’i:j14o liters of illicit liquor
vverg “seized. So taking into
140 liters of liquor was

seiized from house of the petitioner and that he

i iiinvolived earlier in such crime reveals prima facie

._ his ir’u_}’o.l._Verr:ent in the crime.

“_ So far as grant of anticipatory bail is

x _coi1cerned, the principles are altogether different from

grounds to be considered for the grant of bail under

K