1 Crl.Misc.

131/2022

KAYG010004112022

35 Crl.Misc./131/2022 EXCISE PS, SHAHPUR

Savita W/o Siddya Pawar Vs. Excise PS Shahapur
IN THE COURT OF THE SESSIONS JUDGE AT YADGIRI
Dated this the 12TH day of April, 2022

Present:- Sri. Nanda Kumar B.,

B.A.L., LL.B.,
District and Sessions Judge,
Y A D G I R I.

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.131/2022

PETITIONERs: 1) Savita W/o Siddaya Pawar,

Aged about: 26 years,
Occ: Household,
R/o Ram Samudra Thanda,
Tq. and Dist. Yadgiri.

2) Shanthibayi W/o Pulya,

Aged about: 70 years,
Occ: Household,
R/o Ram Samudra Thanda,
Tq. and Dist. Yadgiri.

(By Sri. H.M.Patil, Advocate)

Vs.

RESPONDENT: The State of Karnataka through

Excise Department, Shahapur Sub-
Division, Range, Yadgiri.

(Represented by Public Prosecutor)

 2 Crl.Misc.131/2022

ORDER ON BAIL PETITION U/SEC.438 OF CR.P.C.

This petition is filed under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C., on behalf of

the petitioners seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime

No.35/2021-22 registered by the Excise Department, Shahapur

Sub-Division, Range Yadgiri, for the offences punishable under

Secs.13, 14, 15, 32(1), 38-(A) of Karnataka Excise Act.

2. The gist of the allegations leveled against the

petitioners as per the FIR and other materials on record is as

follows;

On credible information that on 28-2-2022 at about 5-00 p.m.

the Excise Sub Inspector, Yadgiri Range along with his staff

conducted raid on the house of the petitioner No.1 situated at

Ramasamudra Tanda and found 4 liters of illicit liquor and 20 liters

of rotten jiggery stored illegally in contravention of the provisions

U/Secs. 13, 14 and 15 of the Karnataka Excise Act which are

punishable under Sections 32(1), 38(A) of the Karnataka Excise

Act. Hence, the present case has been registered against the present

petitioner No.1 and the owner of the house (unknown) for the above
 3 Crl.Misc.131/2022

said offences.

3. In the bail petition it is the contention of the petitioners

that petitioner No.2 is the owner of the said house and they are

innocent and that a false case has been registered against them.

That offence alleged are not punishable with death or imprisonment

for life. They are the only earning member of their family. That

the respondent police are in search of them and in the event if they

are arrested, they will be subsequent to humiliation. They are ready

to abide by any condition and also ready to offer surety. Hence, has

sought for grant of anticipatory bail.

4. The learned PP has filed objections along with the

objections of I.O. In the objections, the learned Public Prosecutor

has reiterated the facts narrated in the First Information Report. It

is further contended by the learned Public Prosecutor that, the

petitioners have stored illicit liquor in their house knowing fully

well that consumption of illicit liquor is dangerous to human life.

The offences alleged against the petitioners are serious and non-

bailable in nature and if the petitioners are granted bail, they would

abscond and would not be available for investigation/trial. Hence,

 4 Crl.Misc.131/2022

on these grounds, has sought for rejection of bail.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also

the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the materials on record.

6. The points that arise for my consideration are:

1. Whether the petitioners have made out any

grounds for grant of anticipatory bail as
sought for?

2. What order?

7. My findings to the above points are as follows:

Point No.1 : In the AFFIRMATIVE;

Point No.2 : As per final order;
For the following;

REASONS

8. POINT No.1: The offences alleged against the

petitioners is under Secs.13, 14, 15, 32(1), 38(A) of Karnataka

Excise Act. The said offences are not punishable with death or

imprisonment for life.

8(a) Under the provisions of 437 of Cr.P.C., it is seen that a

women is entitled for bail even in heinous offences until and unless

there is compelling circumstances to reject bail. In the present case,

 5 Crl.Misc.131/2022

there is no dispute to the fact that petitioners are women, aged

about 26 and 70 respectively.

8(b) The allegations leveled against the petitioners is that

petitioner No.1 had stored illicit liquor to the extent of 4 liters and

rotten jiggery to the extent of 20 liters in the house of petitioner

No.2. However, at this stage there is nothing on record to infer that

the house in which the alleged liquor is stated to have been stored,

belongs to the petitioners. There is also nothing on record at this

stage to show that the petitioners are the persons who had kept the

alleged illicit liquor in the said house for sale. These are all

question of facts which needs to be proved by the prosecution at the

time of trial. Therefore, I am of the opinion that, the present

petitioners who are stated would be a permanent resident of Ram

Samudra Thanda, could be granted anticipatory bail as sought for,

on certain conditions. Hence, I hold the above point No.1 in the

Affirmative.

9. POINT NO.2: In view of my findings on point No.1, I

proceed to pass the following:

 6 Crl.Misc.131/2022

ORDER

The bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioners under

Sec.438 Cr.P.C., is allowed. The petitioners shall execute
personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each along with a
surety for the like-sum before the investigating officer, in the
event of their arrest in Cr.No.35/2021-22 for the offences
punishable under Sections 13, 14, 15, 32(1), 38-(A) of
Karnataka Excise Act registered by the Respondent Police
Station, within one month from the date of this order on the
following;
CONDITIONS:
1. That the petitioners shall assist the investigating
officer in the matter of investigation in connect
with this case.
2. That the petitioners shall attend the respondent on
every Sunday between 10-00 a.m. to 2-00 p.m. for
a period of one month from the date of this order.

2. That the petitioners shall not cause any threat to

the prosecution witnesses.

(Dictated to the Judgment-Writer, typed by him directly on

Computer, revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the
open court on this the 12th day of April, 2022)

(NANDA KUMAR.B)
District and Sessions Judge,
Yadgiri.
 7 Crl.Misc.131/2022

Order pronounced in the open

Court vide separate detail order.
The operative portion of the said
order reads as under;
 8 Crl.Misc.131/2022

ORDER

The bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioners under

Sec.438 Cr.P.C., is allowed. The petitioners shall execute
personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each along with a
surety for the like-sum before the investigating officer, in the
event of their arrest in Cr.No.35/2021-22 for the offences
punishable under Sections 13, 14, 15, 32(1), 38-(A) of
Karnataka Excise Act registered by the Respondent Police
Station, within one month from the date of this order on the
following;
CONDITIONS:
1. That the petitioners shall assist the investigating
officer in the matter of investigation in connect
with this case.
2. That the petitioners shall attend the respondent on
every Sunday between 10-00 a.m. to 2-00 p.m. for
a period of one month from the date of this order.

2. That the petitioners shall not cause any threat to

the prosecution witnesses.

District and Sessions Judge,

Yadgiri.