High Court Karnataka High Court

Subbanna S/O Hanumanthappa vs State Of Karnataka on 23 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Subbanna S/O Hanumanthappa vs State Of Karnataka on 23 September, 2008
Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy
 éT;::TE OF RARHATAKA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA  'E   

CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD  

DATED THIS THE 23*" DAY OF SEPTEME.ER_:V'?2.I3éS   

BEFORE

THE Howg;_E MR. JUSTICE c_.R. i(V"E3.¥_%'ARAS.'v\I?-\V?'IIY_V.V  I

QRIMINAL ggnnom NQII4I,'?.@ xx 0E 2QQf%8I5 

 ;

SUBBANNA I   '
SIOHANUMANTHAP¥'A_:W._ _'   
AGED-42YEARS      
AGRICULTURIST     'T '   

we NAvALATT1'vzLLAT5E'  '

SANDUR TALUK » * T'

BELLARY m:;TRz_<::T"'   _ ;  PEHTIQNER.
{BY ski: T zAKsHVHx:§;m5T  ADVOCATE)

A_ND_:

BY I.TS*PU_BE. ICTPRQSECUTOR  RESPONDENT

. (!ETSRi§”–E,;’H EGTKHINDI, HIGH CQURT
2 GOVER;?j§Mi~.’NT PLEADER)

THIS’ V IS FILED U}’S.439 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL

§Ec§cE{>1;RE BY THE ADVOCATE ma THE PEFITIONER PRAYENG THAT
THIS HGHFELE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER

‘T era’ –._EAr=_..=;H cams N{3.111f200S REGISTERED BY smaua POLICE
_ smsrxpm IN THE EVENT 9E H15 ARREST.

‘ ‘ A THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS BEFORE THE
” “COURT THIS DAY, THE CQURT MAIDE THE FOLLOWING: –

Q./”

being transported concecting trip sheets and the permits_ in

the name of B.M.M. Mines Company and on

Lorry drivers :’evea¥ed that accused £105.}, ane 2

the iron ore in those Lerries an-d””‘h*ended _e9e:- :th.ese-,

documents and sent them. The thaxéeeforgeétfitthve’1._

documents in the name M.i’rt-e.$j’v_:ehd”””v§ere ”

transporting the iron orezs-end .t!’:’ere_fi9’%”.~xsheated’–the B.M.M.

A Mines Company as weI§ as the”Go-Kétéwnieshtfww.

3. L”eafh_ed :Ha”§fhs.itcottiflifgoeernment Pieader has flied
the objecttontx s–tetem:ent;..v_ S

‘ heard the Seamed counsel for the petitioner

es welfes theV’ti§’ee1thed High Court Government Pieader.

The’ metents of the FIR discloses that PSI of Sahéur

W”57f’*P§’i5cesStetéo’n has registered a case in Crime no.111/2063 on

ttieV_’c’ono:p§aint of Bfibdui Rehman, S/o.Mhd. Suieman See,

‘:’_4’eg.e£§ 49 years, vehicle éra-charge of B.M.M. Mines, against the

“”‘eccosed no.1, S.V.Sankanur and accused ne.2, Satish

%.

Sankanur, for the offence punishable under

420, 453, 468, and 471 of Indian Pena} Cocie.-».iLts,c’eiiteAnts”

further discioses that accused nos.1 :and:.2.’}%:e’re’:tr’a*:is:3t3VrtViii.g;.

iron ore is vehicie bearing nos.§<A.__.2S

by creating fake documents in tu¥i7e_V naineV"Of Mines.
This petitioner is accused 7_xTigV-evua'$.!_ei;iation made against
this petiticner is that he t2eiri_§–.Vtiae Towizaiiiaitthe iand, from

which the iron tai:iVa'd«—-tcA pay the reyaity

and thereby'i-caatraiigenédi,Aftihei"_"p'roi;r1sions of Mines and
Minerals i3ev'ei_otJit1é'iiit'aA.ai;eLV'i'3§i;.'uiatien Act, 2.957. Learned

High Court (§dtiermfrie_nt'fiieader submitted that the effence

_~'"a§iege.d_:'3ag.a.iV:nst the Vipeti-ticiner is under Section 4 of the Mines

.a–n_'<:i.i¥iina.ra.¥s'D'a\iei–9pment and Raguiation Act. 1957.

6. affence aiieged against the petitioner is not

.A__;:r::i_’:’:ii_sVii’iat:ie with death or imprisonment of iife. In the instant

the date of crime is 26.04.2805. Petitioner was

arrayed as accused 119.9. Chargesheet has been laid. The

order of the Triai Court éiscioses that accused nes.1 to 7

appeared before the ieamecf Magistrate and they were
‘ <i./

5

released on bail. It is observed in the order paossiezibin

Cr1.M.P.Na.13?/2008 dated 21.o4.2oas, that

summons were issued and summons were sers£’ed’*~o:i3 ,a’c~cused.” ‘* 2

nos. 5 and 9 personally they did notA.a;>*p_’earr, lthherefairefr2_ori:s_AA

baiiabie warrant was issued.

7.1:» p.v.NARAs1Mm.AaAot\;gA,’ltt;;;r)i;Tg {CBI)”‘r”e’oorted in
1995(4) Crimes 213, their Loircls’ii’i;§s’Vo§..§;fiei_isil+i_%gh cam have

stated that eve~n”‘tijIeugi1 filed and non-

bailable :v;arra:itVi’9a:,er_:e'<iss«aei:l.__by." the committal ceur': either

High Ceurtloricoaft has jurisdiction to entertain

___the aaticisoatory' application and if the facts and

A'~._circt:;:i'istara;es'A'warrants oetitioner be protected from being

bail.

keat”i’§.r;ectlstooyi’:;’o’efore they approach the regular court far

;;

~..f’

in the instant case, at the iwst instance, the crime

‘ registered against the accused nos} and 2. Later

. ufinvestigation revealed that this petitioner having not paid the

royaity, he was also implicated in the crime. Now the

investigation is completed and chargesheet has been laid on
{/ er

13.11.2901 The offence aiieged against the petiti’e.peiE.:is’¢_notj

punishabie with death or imprisonment

considering the facts and circupmstancesiof thei.e.a.s§i, “in’re’y

opinion, this petitioner is entitled’ufeif”enticip’etoi*3,…’.§aa.i:i;€ this
Stew. __ . ._ _

9. The fear’ ‘€’.:*’f{,~”V’.»”‘.;”\V(?’ p.ifose’t:’::1ti£’ir:i::V the petitioner is
iet on baii, he€.miiii–:fi_4tei{tiper iaéiith.Vt}i*e:.ipio§seeution witness wiii be
safeguarded “i§epos3i.hg-isttifigeptiweehditions while granting

beii.

. ‘View of iiii the above discussion, I pass the

f7oii–ieVwine 2» j ‘V ” ii – . it

iiietitioneiii is grantee with anticipatory baii.

‘iitespiondent Police are directed to release him on bait,

the event of his arrest, in Crime no.1094/2808 of Sander

V i _ ittii:-iiiice Station or in C.C.no.111/2005 oh the fiie of the 3i~4i=c,

Sandur, on his executing a personal bond for a sum of

Rs.25,000/- with two sureties for the iikesum to the
v.