Allowed

Sri Sharanappa S/O Ningappa Chatragudi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Sept 2022CRL.P/102489/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal petition to quash an order rejecting the petitioner's application for interim release of a seized vehicle. The Court directed the release of the car to the petitioner subject to conditions including executing an indemnity bond, furnishing sureties, and prohibiting transfer of the vehicle.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order was quashed and the seized vehicle (KA-37-N-4635) ordered to be released to the interim custody of the petitioner subject to conditions.

Sri Sharanappa S/O Ningappa Chatragudi Vs… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

CRL.P No. 102489 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102489 OF 2022 (482-)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI SHARANAPPA S/O NINGAPPA CHATRAGUDI, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHOUDAPUR, TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. NEELENDRA.D.GUNDE.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BEVOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 12.08.2022 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I AT KOPPAL IN SPCL.POCSO NO.30/2022 IN CRIME NO.38/2022) THEREBY REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED U/S 457 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING RELEASE OF VEHICLE AND CONSEQUENTLY GRANT THE INTERIM CUSTODY OF THE SAME PETITIONER HEREIN.

¶16

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY. THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING.

¶17

¶18

CRL.P No. 102489 of 2022

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Petitioner who is accused has filed this petition

¶21

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 12.08.2022 passed by Additional District and Sessions FTSC-I Koppal in SPCL.POSCO No.30/2022 rejecting the application filed by petitioner seeking interim release of car bearing registration No.KA-37-N-4635.

¶22

In the petition, the petitioner has contended that he is the owner of vehicle in question. There is no counter claim. Already investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed and as such the vehicle is no longer required for investigation. He is ready to offer indemnity bond as well as surety to the satisfaction of the Court. If the vehicle is continued to be kept idly exposed to sun and rain, it would deteriorate. He is ready abide by any conditions that may be imposed.

¶23

Learned High Court Government Pleader

¶24

submits that since the vehicle in question is used for commission of offence, at the time of evidence its

¶25

¶26

CRL.P No. 102489 of 2022

¶27

presence is required for identification and prays to dismiss the petition.

¶28

Heard arguments and perused the records.

¶29

From material placed on record it is evident that

¶30

a charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Section 363, 376(2)(i) of I.P.C. as well as Section 6 of the POSCO 2012. The allegation against accused is that on 08.09.2021 at about 9.00 P.M, at the dilapidated premises belonging to the Deepa mahila Mandali of Choudapura Village, accused committed rape on the prosecutrix. Thereafter about 4 to 5 times he repeated the said offence and ultimately on 24.03.2022 at about 5.00 p.m., accused kidnapped the prosecutrix in his car bearing registration No.KA-37-N4635 there by committed the offences punishable under Section 363, 376(2) (i) of IPC.

¶31

During investigation the concerned police have

¶32

arrested the petitioner and seized the vehicle. After

¶33

¶34

CRL.P No. 102489 of 2022

¶35

completing all investigations formalities, charge sheet is filed against the accused.

¶36

The petitioner moved the trial Court seeking interim release of the vehicle. Vide the impugned order, the trial Court has rejected the application mainly on the ground that it is used for commission of offences and it is required for identification.

¶37

The documents produced by the petitioner established fact that he is the R.C. holder of the vehicle in question. Since investigation is completed, the vehicle no longer required for the purpose of investigation. If the vehicle is kept idle without use exposed to rain and sun, it would be damaged and its value would be deteriorated. The apprehension of the prosecution that at the time of evidence, the vehicle is required for identification and the petitioner may not produced it may be over come imposing the stringent conditions. In this regard the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of

¶38

¶39

CRL.P No. 102489 of 2022

¶40

C.M. MUDALIAR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT¹ (C.M.

¶41

MUDALIAR’s case ) is relevant, wherein it is observed that it is no use to keep seized vehicle at Police Station for longer period and the Magistrate may pass appropriate orders immediately taking bond and guarantee as well as security for the returns of vehicle or production of it at the time of evidence for identification. In the present case also by imposing stringent conditions the proper provisions may be made for production of vehicle as and when directed by Court. In the Insurance Policy dated 30.10.2020, the value of vehicle is specified as Rs.4,99,274/-. Therefore it would be appropriate to directed the petitioner to execute indemnity bond for Rs.4,50,000/- with 2 surety for the likesum. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

The criminal petition is allowed.

¶44

1 AIR 2003 SC 638

¶45

¶46

CRL.P No. 102489 of 2022

¶47

The order passed by respondent dated 12.08.2022 hereby quashed and the application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.. by the petitioner-Car owner is hereby allowed.

¶48

In the result, car bearing registration No.KA-37-N-4635 seized in Crime No.38/2022 of Yelburga Police Station is ordered to be released to the interim custody of the petitioner subject to following conditions.

¶49

i) Petitioner shall execute indemnity bond for an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lakh only) and also furnish two sureties for the said amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate Court.

¶50

ii) Petitioner herein shall not change the colour and identity of the said vehicle.

¶51

iii) Colour photographs of the said vehicle is ordered to be taken from different angles and they should be produced before the concerned JMFC Court.

¶52

iv) The petitioner shall not transfer the vehicle in any manner in favour of anybody till conclusion of the proceedings.

¶53

¶54

CRL.P No. 102489 of 2022

¶55

v) The petitioner shall produce the vehicle before the JMFC Court as and when directed.

¶56

vi) The jurisdictional police are directed to intimate the concerned RTO to make entry in the concerned register about the pendency of case in Crime No.38/2022 of Yelburga P.S.

¶57

Sd/JUDGE

¶58

Sri Sharanappa S/O Ningappa Chatragudi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sharanappa S/O Ningappa Chatragudi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju S/O Basappa Kali, Vs Shanta W/O Vasanth Bevinamatti

Saleem a Nadaf S/O Alla Bhakshi Nadaf Vs the Karnataka State Police

The Manager/ Secretary Kisan Krishi Seva Sangh, Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Bajirao Sadashiv Ghorpade Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Balappa S/O Basappa Limbikai Vs Sri. Satish S/O Krishna Masuti

G.Ameed Basha Vs Shrinivas Traders