SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36695

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M G UMA
SMT. BUDDI VIJAYA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P/11251/2022



- 1 -

CRL.P No. 11251 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11251 OF 2022

BETWEEN:

1.

SMT. BUDDI VIJAYA

W/O LATE MAJJALINGAM

AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS

R/A VANTHADAPALLI VILLAGE

JARALA POST

GUDE MANDALA

VISHAKHAPATTANAM DISTRICT

ANDHRA PRADESH STATE-531111

2.

SMT GUNDERI PUSHPA

W/O SUBBARAO

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

R/A KOTHA GUDAM VILLAGE

G K BEEDI MANDALA

R V NAGAR POST

VISHAKHAPATTANAM DISTRICT

ANDHRA PRADESH STATE-531133

3.

SMT BUDI DEVI @ DEVI

W/O CHINNARAO

AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

R/A NEELAVARAM VILLAGE

GANDE MANDALA

VISHAKHAPATTANAM DISTRICT

ANDHRA PRADESH STATE-531133

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. MALLESHA .V, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by

NAYANA S

Location: High

Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

CRL.P No. 11251 of 2022

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY VIVEK NAGAR POLICE STATION

BENGALURU-560095

REPT BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT BUILDING

BENGALURU-560001

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. K. RAHUL RAI, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.439 PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE

PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.93/2022 OF VIVEK NAGAR

P.S.,

BANGALORE

FOR

THE

OFFENCE

P/U/S

8(c),20(ii)(b),22(C),23(C),27-A OF NDPS ACT ON THE FILE OF

THE XXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND

SPECIAL JUDGE, (NDPS), BANGALORE (CCH-33) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioners-accused Nos.8, 9 and 10 are before

this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C. in Crime No.93/2022 of Viveknagar Police Station,

pending on the file of XXXIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions

Judge & Spl. Judge(NDPS), Bengaluru (CCH-33) registered

for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(C),

27(a), 20(ii)(B) and 23(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and

- 3 -

CRL.P No. 11251 of 2022

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’),

on the basis of the first information lodged by the

informant Deepak.R.

2.

Heard Sri.Mallesha.V, learned Counsel for the

petitioners and Sri.K.Rahul Rai, learned High Court

Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused

the materials on record.

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted

that the petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.8 to 10.

They are innocent and have not committed any offences

as alleged. They have been falsely implicated in the matter

without any basis. They were apprehended on 24.09.2022

and since then they are in judicial custody. The allegations

against accused Nos.8, 9 and 10 is that they were found in

possession of about 3 kgs of ganja each, which is of

intermediate quantity. These petitioners are stated to be

the carriers of the contraband at the instance of the other

accused. Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act is not at all

- 4 -

CRL.P No. 11251 of 2022

applicable against these petitioners. The petitioners are

the permanent residents of the addresses mentioned in

the cause title to the petition and are ready and willing to

abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by

this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.

4.

Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious

allegations are made against the petitioners for having

committed the offences. The petitioners and other accused

have committed the offences. Initially, on credible

information,

accused

No.1

was

apprehended

and

commercial quantity of contraband was seized at his

instance and thereafter accused Nos.7 to 10 were

apprehended and from their possession 8 kg of hashish oil

and 10 kgs of ganja were recovered. Therefore, it is clear

that commercial quantity of hashish oil and intermediate

quantity of ganja were recovered from accused Nos.7 to

10 and it was a joint recovery. The rigor of Section 37(2)

- 5 -

CRL.P No. 11251 of 2022

of the Act is very much applicable to the facts of the case

as the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top