Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 299 (KAR)

Mohammed Pasha Miyan S/o Abdul Razzak v. State of Karnataka

2017-02-03

B.A.PATIL

body2017
ORDER : This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.4 to 6 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No. 153/2016 of Bagdal Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 269, 270, 278, 290, 336, 109 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 8 and 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, On 20.12.2016, the respondent Police received credible information to the effect that in Shivara of Bagdal village some persons have indulged in illegal activities of preparing some unhygienic materials which are harmful to the health of local people and which would affect the atmosphere. Immediately, the police along with panch witnesses went to the spot and conducted raid, wherein the petitioners were boiling cattle bones and fat in a kadai and were preparing Dalda, Toothpaste and soap. Immediately, the Police seized the same and a case has been registered against the accused persons. 3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent State. 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners are that petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offences alleged against them and they have been falsely implicated in this case. The offences alleged against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The offences levelled against the petitioners under the provisions of IPC are bailable offences and the offences levelled against the petitioners under the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 are not bailable offences, as such, the petition is maintainable before this Court. He has further contended that petitioners are respectable members of the family and they have got both movable and immovable properties therefore, there is no chance of they being absconded. It is further contended that if the petitioners are released on bail, they are ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and they are ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition. 5. On the contrary, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent State vehemently contended that the petitioners have involved in heinous offence of polluting the environment which is harmful to the people and as well as environment. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition. 5. On the contrary, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent State vehemently contended that the petitioners have involved in heinous offence of polluting the environment which is harmful to the people and as well as environment. He has further contended that petitioners were absconding and they were not available for investigation and interrogation and as such, the investigation has been hampered. At this juncture, if the petitioners are released on bail, there is likelihood of they being absconded and they may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. I have perused the contents of the complaint, FIR and other material produced along with the petition. 7. The complaint discloses that, when on the credible information the police conducted raid, they found the accused persons running away from the place and there they saw boiling of cattle bones and its fat in kadai and they were preparing Dalda, Toothpaste and Soap and thereby, they have involved in harmful activities which would affect the life of the people and environment. As to whether the accused persons have committed the alleged offences or not, is a matter which has to be adjudicated at the time of trial. The offences alleged against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and nothing is to be recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Therefore, I feel that if the petitioners are released on bail by imposing stringent conditions, it would safeguard the interest of the prosecution and it would meet the ends of justice. 8. For the aforementioned reasons, the petition is allowed. The respondent Police are hereby directed to release the petitioners/accused Nos.4 to 6 on bail, in the event of their arrest, for the above said offences, subject to the following conditions : i. The petitioners shall execute personal bonds for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) each with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. ii. The petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly. iii. The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required and cooperate for investigation. iv. ii. The petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly. iii. The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required and cooperate for investigation. iv. The petitioners shall mark their attendance before the Investigating Officer once in fortnight; v. The petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional Court and execute personal bonds, surety bonds and furnish surety within thirty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.