Sri Hajilal S/O Hajianwarsab Pailwan vs. The State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sri. Hajilal, filed a criminal petition under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 114/2021 registered at Jamakhandi Town Police Station. The alleged offences are under Sections 3 and 7(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner illegally stocked 36,220 kgs of rice, valued at approximately Rs. 5,43,000/-, which was meant for government distribution schemes. This rice was seized from a shed near his house. The petitioner claims to be a licensed trader with GST registration and has produced a tax invoice for purchasing 31,000 kgs of raw rice. The respondent, State of Karnataka, represented by the Jamkhandi Town Police, opposes the bail, alleging the petitioner is a habitual offender with multiple prior cases.
Held
The Court allowed the petition and granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The Court noted that the petitioner is a licence holder for operating as a trader and possesses a GST registration certificate, and has produced a tax invoice for the purchase of a significant quantity of raw rice. While acknowledging the prosecution's allegations of illegal stocking of rice meant for public distribution without a license or permit, the Court found it necessary to give the petitioner an opportunity to place all relevant materials before the Investigating Officer. The petitioner undertook to cooperate with the investigation. The Court directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- with a surety, subject to several conditions including appearing before the Investigating Officer within a week, cooperating with the investigation, not tampering with evidence, appearing regularly before the trial court, not involving in criminal activities, and not leaving the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission. The prosecution was granted liberty to seek cancellation of bail if the petitioner commits further offences.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 114/2021 registered for offences under Sections 3 and 7(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, considering the allegations of illegal stocking of government-distributed rice. Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argues he is a licensed trader with GST registration and purchased the rice legally under a tax invoice. He claims innocence, stating he has not committed any offence and cannot have purchased such a large quantity from individual beneficiaries. He asserts he is a respectable person with deep roots in society and his arrest would cause hardship to his family. He undertakes to cooperate with the investigation. Revenue's Contentions: The respondent contends the petitioner is a habitual offender with three previous cases registered against him. They argue he has diverted rice meant for public distribution and has violated previous bail conditions, indicating a likelihood of committing similar offences if granted relief. They seek rejection of the petition.
Sections Cited
Section 438, Section 3, Section 7(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER The petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in Crime No.114/2021 of Jamakhandi Town Police Station, registered for offence punishable under Sections 3 and 7(2) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 2. Heard both side and perused the material on record.
It is alleged that the accused had illegally stocked about 36,220 kgs of rice which was meant for distribution for the poor and needy persons under various Schemes of the Government, in a shed situated near his house behind Bismillah Khanavali. On 14.12.2021 at about 1:00 p.m., the Tahasildar, Jamkhandi informed the matter to the complainant namely the Food Shirestedar. Thereafter, along with other officials raided the shed and a total quantity of
3 36,220 kgs of rice valued at about Rs.5,43,000/- was seized.
It is alleged that the accused had stored the rice meant for public distribution, supplied by the Government under different Schemes, without any licence and permit and thereby, committed the aforementioned offence.
The learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the petitioner is a trade licence holder and he has obtained the GST Registration Certificate. He has purchased the rice under a tax invoice from one Shree Sai Samarth Traders. He submits that petitioner is innocent and false cases are being registered against him for the reasons best known. He submits that petitioner is doing his business legally and he has not committed any offence as alleged. He would further contend that according to the complainant, rice was purchased from the public for a lesser price by the petitioner
4 with an intention to sell it at a higher price, which is not believable, since he cannot purchase 36,220 kgs of rice from the beneficiaries. He submits that petitioner is a respectable person having deep roots in the Society having movable and immovable properties. If he is arrested, he and his family members will be put to untold hardship. He submits that petitioner will cooperate with the investigation and appear before the Court regularly.
Learned High Court Government Pleader has contended that the petitioner is a habitual offender and there are three more cases registered against him in Crime Nos.123/2021 of Jamakhandi Rural Police Station and 7/2022 and 72/2021 of Jamakhandi Town Police Station. He contends that petitioner has indulged in diverting the rice meant for public distribution supplied under Public Distribution Scheme of the Government and he has violated the conditions of bail granted earlier and therefore, if he is granted any relief, he will commit
5 similar offences. He, therefore seeks to reject the petition.
It is alleged that the petitioner was found stocked rice illegally without any licence or permit in his shed, which was meant for public distribution, supplied by the Government under various Schemes. A total quantity of 36,220 kgs of rice valued at Rs.5,43,300/- is said to have been seized under a mahazar.
According to the petitioner, he is a licence holder for operating as a trader and he has the GST registration certificate. The copies of the same have been produced along with the petition. A copy of the tax invoice for having purchased a total quantity of 31,000 kgs of raw rice valued at Rs.5,73,500/-, is also annexed to the petition. The petitioner claims to be innocent and he has contended that he has not stored the rice which is meant for public distribution supplied by the Government under various Schemes.
6
In the above facts and circumstances, an opportunity shall have to be given to the petitioner to place all these materials before the Investigation Officer. Petitioner has undertaken to co-operate with the investigation.
Hence, the following: ORDER i) Petition is allowed, ii) In the event of arrest of the petitioner in Cr.No.114/2021 of Jamakhandi town police station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, he shall be released subject to following conditions: a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) with a surety for likesum,
7 b) He shall furnish proof of his residential address and shall inform the Investigating Officer/ Court if there is any change in the address, c) He shall co-operate with the investigation of the case, d) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence either directly or indirectly, e) He shall appear regularly before the trial Court, f) He shall not involve in any criminal activities, g) He shall not leave the juri iction of the trial Court without prior permission of the learned trial Judge, h) It is made clear that if the petitioner involves in committing offences as alleged, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail. JUDGE
PJ/ Jm/-
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.