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

- 1 -

CRL.P No.100974 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100974 OF 2023 (439-)

BETWEEN:

SRI SHIVANAND ALIAS SHIVAPPA

S/O HANAMANT BHAJANTRI

AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,

R/O. SIDDAPUR, TAL. JAMAKHANDI,

DIT. BAGALKOTE-587330.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SRINAND A. PACHHAPURE, ADVOCATE FOR

SRI. RAJENDRA R.PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

THROUGH JAMAKHANDI POLICE STATION,

NOW REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

AT DHARWAD-580011

…RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.PC.,

SEEKING TO GRANT BAIL THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED IN CRIME

NO. 63/2023 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 20A OF

NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT,

1985, BY THE RESPONDENT JAMAKHANDI PS, PENDING ON

THE FILE OF COURT OF PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,

BAGALKOTE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

SAMREEN AYUB

DESHNUR

High Court of

Karnataka,

Dharwad

- 2 -

CRL.P No.100974 of 2023

Heard on bail application.

2.

On the basis of a complaint filed by one

G.G.Biradar, P.S.I. (Law & Order), Jamkhandi Rural Police

Station, the Jamkhandi Rural Police Station has registered

a

case

against

accused-petitioner

herein

in

Crime

No.63/2023 for the commission of the offence punishable

under

Section

20(A)

of

the

Narcotic

Drugs

and

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that the first

informant got credible information that the accused had

grown ganja in the land bearing Sy.No.162/6 measuring 1

acre 15 guntas. In view of the same, the first informant

and the staff rushed to the spot and found that the

accused had grown ganja in his land. The first informant

conducted panchanama and seized 76 kgs. 800 grams of

ganja plants and thus, the accused has committed the

offence alleged.

- 3 -

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

has submitted his arguments, that the petitioner has not

committed any offence as alleged against him. He submits

that, as per the case of the prosecution, the Investigating

Officer has seized the entire alleged ganja plant, weighed

the same to show as weighing 76 kgs. 800 gms. The

Investigating Officer has not separated the flowering or

fruiting tops of cannabis plant and as such, the same

cannot be called as ganja. The seized plant includes

stems, leaves, branches, fruiting parts and even soil and

under the circumstances, the stem, leaves, branches

cannot be termed as ganja. Further, it is submitted that,

as per the case of the prosecution itself, the alleged ganja

plants were grown in between the sugarcane crop and as

such, there are chances of said ganja having grown by

itself automatically and the petitioner is not at all aware of

the growth of the said plants. The petitioner is arrested on

17.04.2023 and is in judicial custody since the date of his

arrest. The investigation is already completed and the

petitioner is not required for investigation. It is further

- 4 -

submitted that the petitioner is an poor agriculturist; he is

not aware of the growth of the ganja plants in the land; he

is the only earning member of the family consisting of his

wife, three children, and father aged about 72 years and

mother aged about 68 years, who are suffering from age

old ailments. The petitioner has no antecedents of having

been convicted for any of the offences. To substantiate his

contention, learned counsel had relied on the orders of this

Court

passed

in

Criminal

Petition

No.101982/2022,

disposed of on 18.08.2022 (Sri. Dongrisab Vs. The State

of Karnataka) and Criminal Petition No.200085/2019,

disposed of on 05.02.2019 (Pundalik Vs. The State

through Indi Rural Police Station). On all these grounds,

sought for allowing the bail application.

5.

On perusal of the prosecution papers, it is

crystal clear that the ganja plants alleged to have been

seized by the Investigating Officer includes stem, flower

and leaves. The age of the ganja plants is also not

disclosed by the Investigating Officer at this stage.

- 5 -

6.

In the case of Srinivasalu Vs. State of

Karnataka reported in 2019 SCC Online Kar 2711, this

Court has held as under:

“11. As stated supra, the complainant Excise

Officer has seized 535 Ganja plants weighing 900

Kgs. It is specifically stated that the Ganja plants

were removed with roots and the entire Ganja

plants were weighed and found to be 900 Kgs.

Even when the sample was taken and sent to FSL

for examination the Ganja plants including leaves,

seeds, flower buds were sent. In the case of

K.K.Rejji stated supra this Court has observed in

para No.10 of the order as follows:

“10.

In the first instance, we have to go

on

the

premise

that

prosecution

charge

against

the

accused

is

based

on

alleged

seizure of Ganja. Ganja is defined under the

provision of NDPS Act as follows.-

2(iii)(b) Ganja, that is, the flowering or

fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding

the seeds and leaves when not accompanied

by the tops), by whatever name they

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