Allowed

K B Manjunatha v. State by Alduru Police

Karnataka HC31 Oct 2023CRL.A/907/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against order of confiscation of two firearms (M.O.6 and M.O.12) from acquitted appellants. Court set aside the lower court order and released guns subject to bond execution and submission for license renewal within 15 days.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 19.03.2019 set aside; M.O.6 and M.O.12 released to appellants on conditions: execution of indemnity bond and submission for renewal within 15 days.

K B Manjunatha Vs State by Alduru Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 907 OF 2019

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

K.B. MANJUNATHA, S/O BOMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KUNDURU VILLAGE, BANAKAL HOBLI,MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 132.

¶7

K.C. SATHISH, S/O CHOWDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KUNDURU VILLAGE, BANAKAL HOBLI,MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 132.

¶8

Digitally signed by SANDHYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶9

(BY SRI. S.G. RAJENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

…APPELLANTS

¶12

STATE BY ALDURU POLICE, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 454 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONFISCATION DATED 17.03.2018 IN S.C.NO.95/2014 PASSED BY THE II

¶16

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶17

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU IN SO FAR AS M.O.6 AND 12 IS CONCERNED AND ETC.,

¶18

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal is preferred by accused Nos.1 and 2/appellant Nos.1 and 2 against the order dated 19.03.2019 passed on application filed under Section 452 of Cr.P.C. in S.C.No.95/2014 by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru.

¶21

The brief facts of the case are that the

¶22

respondent police, after completion of investigation, filed charge sheet for the offences punishable U/Sec. 143, 144, 147, 148, 504, 506, 307, 324, 326 r/w.149 of Indian Penal

¶23

Code and U/Sec.25 of the Arms Act. During investigation, on 17.08.2014 the respondent police seized one SBML BIRMING HAM, SMALL ARMS CO.LTD., ENGLAND NO.20920 GUN under P.F.No.143/2014, from K.B.Manjunatha -appellant No.1 and on 23.03.2014 seized

¶24

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶25

SINGLE BARREL WEBLEYI SCOTT LTD., BIRMING HAM, MADE IN ENGLAND NO.47906 GUN under P.F.No.39/2014 from K.C.Sathish-appellant No.2. The appellants and others were tried for the above said offences. The learned Sessions Judge, after appreciating the entire material on record, was pleased to acquit all the accused by order dated 17.03.2018 in S.C.No.95/2014. The appellants filed applications U/Sec.452 of Cr.P.C. for release of the above said guns seized from them before the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru in S.C.No.95/2014. The learned Sessions Judge rejected the said applications by his order dated 19.03.2019. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by the court below, the present appeal is filed before this Court.

¶26

I have heard the arguments on both sides and perused the records.

¶27

The respondent Aldur Police have filed

¶28

charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 12 for the

¶29

¶30

NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶31

commission of offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 504, 506, 307, 324, 326 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code and U/Sec.25 of the Arms Act.

¶32

After committal, the case was registered

¶33

against the accused in S.C.No.95/2014 on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru. After trial, the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted all the accused for commission of the alleged offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 504, 506, 307, 324, 326 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code and U/Sec.25 of the Arms Act.

¶34

Learned HCGP Sri. M.R. Patil submitted

¶35

that the prosecution has not preferred any appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge. He further stated that in para No.27 of the judgment, the Trial Court has observed that M.O.Nos.6 and 12 are the fire arms used in this case. None of the accused have claimed these fire arms and the seizure of these fire arms

¶36

¶37

NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶38

is also not proved in accordance with law. Therefore in the absence of any claim, these fire arms are liable to be confiscated to the State after the appeal period. No appeal is preferred by the State or by the complainant/victim. After disposal of the case, Sri. K.B.Manjunatha and Sri. K.C.Satish who are the appellant Nos.1 and 2 herein, have filed application under Section 452 of Cr.P.C. for release of M.O.Nos.6 and 12. On hearing the arguments on both sides, the Trial Court has passed the order on 19.03.2019 on the application filed under Section 452 of Cr.P.C. by the applicants namely Sri. K.B. Manjunatha and Sri. K.C.Satish, which reads as under:

¶39

"The applicants namely Sri. K.B.Manjunath and Sri. K.C. Satish have filed two separate applications u/sec. 452 of Cr.P.C. seeking custody of their two S.B.B.L. Guns vide No.20920 and No.47906 which are seized under P.F.No.143/2014 dated 17.08.2014 and under P.F.39/2014 dated 23.03.2014 respectively in Crime No.71/2014.

¶40

This Hon'ble Court has acquitted the accused persons vide order dated 17.03.2018 for the

¶41

¶42

NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶43

offences p/u/sec. 143, 144, 147, 148, 504, 506, 307, 324, 326 r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code.

¶44

In the order portion of the judgment passed in S.C.No.95/2014, this Court has ordered that M.O.6 and M.O.12 SBBL guns and M.O.7 and 8 live cartridges are ordered to be confiscated to the State after the appeal period.

¶45

As rightly stated by learned P.P. in his objection to the said applications that when M.O.6 and M.O.12 SBBL guns which are respectively sought by these applicants to their custody, are already ordered to be confiscated to the State and that order attained its finality. Once, it is ordered to be confiscated, this Court has no power to release M.O.6 and M.O.12 to the custody of applicants, unless it is set aside by the appellate courts. Hence, there is no question of release the M.O.6 and M.O.12 to the custody of applicants. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶46

ORDER

¶47

The applications filed u/sec.452 of Cr.P.C. by applicants Sri.K.B.Manjunath and K.C. Sathish are hereby rejected."

¶48

The police have produced a copy of gun licenses

¶49

pertaining to Sri. K.B.Manjunath which is valid upto 31.12.2015 and Sri. K.C. Satish which is valid upto

¶50

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶51

31.12.2019. Except these appellants, nobody has claimed

¶52

these properties. These properties are not required by the Trial Court or by this Court. Hence, it is just and proper to allow this appeal by imposing conditions.

¶53

ORDER

¶54

i. The appeal is allowed .

¶55

ii. The order dated 19.03.2019 passed on application filed under Section 452 of Cr.P.C. in S.C.No.95/2014 by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru is set aside.

¶56

iii. The Trial Court is directed to release M.O.No.6 i.e. SBML BIRMING HAM, SMALL ARMS CO.LTD., ENGLAND NO.20920 GUN under P.F.No.143/2014, in favour of Sri. K.B.Manjunatha -appellant No.1 and M.O.No.12 i.e. SINGLE BARREL WEBLEYI

¶57

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶58

SCOTT LTD., BIRMING HAM, MADE IN ENGLAND NO.47906 GUN under P.F.No.39/2014 in favour of Sri. K.C.Sathish-appellant No.2 on the following conditions:

¶59

a) The appellant Nos.1 and 2 shall execute indemnity bond before the Trial Court so as to undertake that appellants shall produce the same before the Court whenever they are directed to do so.

¶60

b) The appellant Nos.1 and 2 shall submit M.O.s.6 and 12 before the concerned authority for renewal within 15 days from the date of release of the same in accordance with law.

¶61

iv. If, for any reason, the appellants fail to abide by the above said conditions, the appellants are directed to surrender

¶62

NC: 2023:KHC:38564 CRL.A No. 907 of 2019

¶63

¶64

M.O.Nos.6 and 12 before the Trial Court

¶65

for taking necessary action in accordance

¶66

with law.

¶67

v. Appellants shall maintain their fire arms in accordance with relevant Act and Rules.

¶68

vi. Send intimation to the concerned Trial

¶69

Court along with a copy of this order.

¶70

Sd/JUDGE

¶71

SSD

K B Manjunatha v. State by Alduru Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K B Manjunatha v. State by Alduru Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. N.S. Doreswamy Vs Smt. N. Anusuyadevi

Khagendra Nath Ghosh Vs Shanmugam

J R Anantharaman Vs Mohammed Illiyas Ahamed

Maco Co. Op Society Vs M/S Rao & Brothers

Sri Kumaraswamy U P Vs K B Mallesh

Sri Premaraja K P Vs K B Mallesh