JUDGMENT 1. This is an anticipatory bail petition filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C. for brevity) seeking to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in C.C.No.2062/2019 pending on the file of I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Gokak for the offences under Sections 4(1A), 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as MMDR Act, for brevity) and Rules 42(1) and 44(1) of Karnataka Municipal Corporations Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as KMC Rules, for brevity). 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 01.06.2019 at about 6.30 a.m., it is alleged that the petitioner in a tractor and trailer bearing No.KA-49/T- 8705/T-8455 was transporting sand illegally in Nallanatti Village on Melavanki-Chigadolli Road. The complainant intercepted the vehicle and seized the sand by drawing mahazar. Thereafter, a private complaint came to be filed on 01.06.2019. The petitioner had filed an anticipatory bail application before the 12th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi sitting at Gokak, which came to be rejected on 30.07.2019. 3. The petitioner has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the case and he is not involved in the alleged incident. The conduct of the raid and seizure without registration of a private complaint is contrary to law and due procedure contemplated under Cr.P.C. as also MMDR Act. That the alleged offences are not punishable with death or life imprisonment. The alleged offences are specially triable by a Special Court established for this purpose. Apart from the above, petitioner submits that he is ready and willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and he would also furnish adequate surety. The petitioner submits that he is a permanent resident of Melavanki Village, Gokak Taluk, Belgavi District and he is having sufficient movable and immovable properties and there is no chance of the petitioner to abscond in the event of grant of anticipatory bail. The petitioner also submits that he would co-operate with any further investigation or requirement of the jurisdictional authorities. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for State. 5. The learned Sessions Judge has held that the petitioner was not arrested at the time of seizure. The petitioner also submits that he would co-operate with any further investigation or requirement of the jurisdictional authorities. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for State. 5. The learned Sessions Judge has held that the petitioner was not arrested at the time of seizure. The trial court has issued summons for appearance of the petitioner and therefore, there cannot be any apprehension on the part of the petitioner as regards his arrest. The learned Sessions Judge has also held that the contention raised by the petitioner that the offences under MMDR Act are exclusively triable by Sessions Judge which is a Special Court and the petitioner would be taken into custody by the Committal Court lacks merit. The Sessions Judge held that despite a Special Court being constituted, the trial court being a Magistrate is required to take note any arbitrary arrest and detention. Hence, there was adequate protection which was available to the petitioner in the event of his arrest. 6. Having considered the complaint and order of the learned Sessions Judge it would not be possible to hold that the apprehension on the part of the petitioner is misplaced or without reasons. It is always possible for the petitioner to be arrested by the concerned authorities and to be produced before the Committal Court as also for the petitioner not to be released immediately on bail. 7. The documents disclose that the seizure of the vehicle as also item viz., sand has already been completed and there may not be any requirement for custodial interrogation or further recovery in the present case. Taking into consideration that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Melavanki Village, Gokak Taluk, Gokak District having movable and immovable property, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner be enlarged on bail by imposing necessary conditions. Accordingly, the following: ORDER The anticipatory bail petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Taking into consideration that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Melavanki Village, Gokak Taluk, Gokak District having movable and immovable property, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner be enlarged on bail by imposing necessary conditions. Accordingly, the following: ORDER The anticipatory bail petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in C.C.No.2062/2019 pending on the file of I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Gokak on the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall appear and surrender before I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Gokak within ten days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and shall furnish a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the said court. ii. The petitioner shall appear before the trial court regularly on the appointed dates; iii. The petitioner shall furnish list of movable and immovable property held by him to the said Court. iv. The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or cause any threat to any of the prosecution witness/s in any manner.