Allowed

Gopal Patnayak v. State by

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2024CRL.P/7934/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail sought under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in an NDPS case involving seizure of 21.250 kgs of ganja, a commercial quantity. The Court noted no criminal antecedents and that trial would take time since a co-accused was absconding, and enlarged the accused on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions; violation entitles prosecution to seek cancellation.

Gopal Patnayak Vs State by — Narcotics (NDPS) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:36358 CRL.P No. 7934 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7934 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: high court of karnataka

¶9

GOPAL PATNAYAK S/O GOBINDA PATTANAYAK AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS LAKSHMINAYARAYANAPURA VILLAGE, BORIGAON POST BRAMHAPURA SADAR, GANJAM, ORISSA - 521 437 (BY SRI. R.V. SHIVANANDA REDDY FOR SRI. PRABHAKARA M., ADVOCATES)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE BY KOLAR CEN CRIME POLICE STATION KOLAR DISTRICT - 517 247 REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001 (BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SPL.C (NDPS) 46/2023 (CR.NO.54/2023) PENDING BEFORE THE PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 20(B)(II)(C) OF NDPS ACT ALLEGED BY THE KOLAR CEN CRIME P.S.

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:36358 CRL.P No. 7934 of 2024

¶17

THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

The petitioner-accused No.1 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.54/2023 of Kolar CEN Crime Police Station, pending in Spl.C.(NDPS)46/2023 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kolar, registered for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Veeresh.R.

¶21

Heard Sri. R.V.Shivananda Reddy., learned counsel for Sri.Prabhakara M., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.N.Anitha Girish, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused the materials on record.

¶22

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:36358 CRL.P No. 7934 of 2024

¶24

“Whether the petitioner is entitled

¶25

for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶26

My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following:

¶27

R E A S O N S

¶28

Petitioner being accused No.1 is seeking grant of bail. He was apprehended on the date of incident i.e., on 13.07.2023 an since then he is in judicial custody.

¶29

It is the contention of the prosecution that the petitioner was in possession of a trolley suitcase and when the same was searched in the presence of the gazetted officer, 21.250 kgs of ganja was found. It was seized under the mahazar in the presence of the pahchas and the gazetted officers. After the investigation, charge sheet is filed against accused Nos.1 and 2. It is stated that accused No.2 is still absconding. However, the matter is now pending before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kolar in Spl.CC No.46/2023 for framing charge.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:36358 CRL.P No. 7934 of 2024

¶32

Undoubtedly, the contraband seized in the presence

¶33

of gazetted officer was 21.250 kgs of Ganja, the sample sent to FSL report tested positive for the presence of Cannabis (ganja) and therefore, it was of commercial quantity and the petitioner was caught red-handed along with the contraband.

¶34

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and was not in possession of commercial contraband cannot be accepted at this stage. However, it is not the contention of the prosecution that the petitioner is required for further investigation or that he is having any criminal antecedent. Even though the contraband, which was found in possession of the accused was little more than commercial quantity, trial in the matter may take sufficiently longer period of time as accused No.2 is still absconding. Since the petitioner is not having any criminal antecedent, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the interest of the prosecution.

¶35

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:36358 CRL.P No. 7934 of 2024

¶38

ORDER

¶39

The petition is allowed.

¶40

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.54/2023 of Kolar CEN Crime Police Station, pending in Spl.C.(NDPS)46/2023 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kolar on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶41

a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.

¶42

b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶43

c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.

¶44

If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.

¶45

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial

¶46

NC: 2024:KHC:36358 CRL.P No. 7934 of 2024

¶47

¶48

Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.

¶49

Sd/(M G UMA) JUDGE

¶50

¶51

List No.: 3 Sl No.: 4

Gopal Patnayak v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Patnayak v. State by

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. Sampangi Reddy Vs Sri.Nagaraju Hanumantharao Nittur

Dr. Rajanna Vs Ssm College of Nursing

M/S Ashatara Laboratories Vs Sri M a Makhandar

Smt. M .S Uma Maheshwari Vs Sri. Thiruvengadathan

Sri M Rajesh Palani Vs Sri Shylendra

Sri Jeevan Vs State of Karnataka