KABC010089492024
IN THE COURT OF THE LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-64) AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 10th day of April 2024
: PRESENT :
Sri.A.V.Patil, B.Com., LL.B.,
LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY.
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS NO.3169/2024
PETITIONER
:
Kalimuthu.M
S/o Muthu Kaman,
Aged about 33 years,
Residing at No.6-2-18A,
Harijana Street,
Mettuneerathan village,
Andipatti Post, Vadipatti Taluk,
Madurai District,
Tamilnadu – 625 218.
Presently residing at No.05/13,
11A
Cross,
Sampangirama
Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 027.
(By Sri.K.N.Narayana Swamy,
Advocate)
– Vs –
2
RESPONDENT
:
Crl.Misc.No.3169/2024
State by Excise Inspector,
Sampangiramanagara Range,
Bengaluru.
(By Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition u/s 438 of
Cr.P.C., for his release on bail in the event of his arrest
in connection with Crime No.72/2023-24/39IE/390206
of respondent Police for the offences punishable u/s 11,
14, 32, 34, 38(a) and 43 of Karnataka Excise Act 1965.
2.

It is stated in the bail application that the
petitioner is innocent and has not committed any
offences as alleged in the complaint. The petitioner is
not involved in the case but he has been falsely
implicated in the case. Since the recovery aspects and
mahazar have been completed, there is no further
recovery to be seized from the petitioner. He is residing
in the address mentioned in the cause title. The
offences
alleged
against
the
petitioner
are
not
punishable either with death or imprisonment for life.
He is ready and willing to abide by the terms and
conditions imposed while releasing him on bail. The
3
Crl.Misc.No.3169/2024
petitioner apprehends his arrest. Hence, prayed to grant
anticipatory bail.
3.

The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the
bail application by filing the objections statement.
According to him, the materials collected during the
investigation prima-facie disclose that the petitioner has
committed the offence alleged against him. Hence,
prayed to dismiss the bail petition filed by the
petitioner.
4.

Heard the arguments from learned Counsel for
petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the
materials placed on record.
5.

The points that arise for my consideration are:
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
anticipatory bail as prayed in the
application filed under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C.?
2. What order?

6.

My answer to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1: In the affirmative;
Point No.2: As per final order for the following;
REASONS
7.

Point No.1:- As per the allegations made in the
complaint on 26.03.2024 at about 09.30 p.m., the
complainant was conducting election inspection in front
4
of
Woodlands
Crl.Misc.No.3169/2024
Hotel,
Rajaram
Sampangiramanagara,
Zone-22,
Mohan
Roy
Bengaluru.

Road,
The
complainant inspected white color Suzuki Access-125
two wheeler vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-05/QA-2965
and found blue colored bag at the footrest of the vehicle
and found 180 ml Bangalore Brandy 40 alcohol Tetra
packets in total 7200 liters of alcohol in violation of
Sec.11, 14 which punishable u/s 32, 34, 38(A), 43 of
K.E. Act and thereby committed the offences alleged in
the complaint. Therefore, by conducting the mahazar
seized the liquor packers in the presence of pancha’s
and arrested the petitioner. After preliminary enquiry
by giving notice u/s 41(A) of Cr.P.C released him.
Hence, the criminal case has been registered against
the petitioner.
8.

Admittedly, subject matter of the crime i.e. liquor
packets alleged to have been stored without license has
been seized by the respondent in the presence of
panchas by conducting panchanama and thereby major
portion of investigation has been completed. The
offences
alleged
against
the
petitioner
are
not
punishable with death or imprisonment for life and they
are triable by the Court of Magistrate. The petitioner is
5
Crl.Misc.No.3169/2024
resident of the address given in the cause title and has
no criminal antecedents. The involvement of the
petitioner and commission of offences by him in the
alleged crime is yet to be proved. The offences alleged
against the petitioner are cognizable offences as per
provisions of Cr.P.C. and the police officer may arrest
the person involved in such offences without warrant.
As the major portion of the investigation is completed
by seizing the above said liquor tetra packets, I do not
find any merits in the submission of learned P.P. that
the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail as he
has
committed
the
economic
offences.

The
apprehension of the State can be taken care of by
putting suitable conditions. Having regard to the facts
& circumstances of the case, gravity of the offences
alleged,
punishment
prescribed
for
them
and
apprehension of the arrest of the petitioner by the I.O.
in the considered opinion of this Court the petitioner is
entitled for grant of anticipatory bail by imposing
appropriate conditions. Accordingly, I answer this point
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.No.3169/2024
ORDER
The bail petition filed by petitioner u/s 438 of
Cr.P.C is hereby allowed and anticipatory bail is
granted.
In the event of his arrest by the I.O. in
Crime
No.72/2023-24/39IE/390206
of
respondent Police for the offences punishable u/s
11, 14, 32, 34, 38(a) and 43 of Karnataka Excise
Act 1965, the I.O. is directed to enlarge him on
bail
on
executing
his
personal
bond
for
Rs.50,000/- with one surety for like sum subject
to following conditions:
1. Petitioner shall appear before the
respondent police within 20 days from the
date of this order.
2. Petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution witnesses in any manner.
3. Petitioner shall appear before the Court
during trial and co-operate for the
disposal of the case.
4. Petitioner shall not commit similar to the
offence alleged against him.
5. Petitioner shall appear before the I.O. as
and when called for investigation.
6. Petitioner shall furnish the attested copy
of their respective Adhaar cards and
7
Crl.Misc.No.3169/2024
present residential address proof to the
I.O.
Notwithstanding this order of anticipatory
bail do not in any manner limit or restrict the
rights and duties of the police or investigating
agency, to investigate into the charges against
the petitioner.
(Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-I directly on computer, typed
by her, taken print out, corrected by me and then pronounced in the
open Court on this the 10th day of April 2024)
(A.V.PATIL)
LXIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions
Judge (CCH-64), Bengaluru City.