IN THE HiGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE I 5 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY CRIMINAL PETITON No.10126/2011 BETWEEN: Subbanna, S/o. Kasanappa @ Kannappa Kale @ Haranshikari, R/o. Muchakhandi, Tq. Bagalkot. . . . Petitioner (By Shri. S.J. Nirnarnik, Advocate) AND: The State of Karnataka, By S.P.P. Dharwad. . . Respondent (By Shri. Anand Kumar Navalgirnath, Government Pleader) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. seeking to grant bail to the petitioner in Special Case No.23/2010 (Bagalkot Rural Crime No.164/2009) for the offences punishable under SEction 20(B) of N.D.P.C. Act on the file of the District and Sessiosn Judge, Bagalkot. This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: g ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. That on 11.09.2009. the Police Sub-Inspector, Bagalkot had filed a complaint against the petitioner in respect of offences punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and registered a case in Crime No. 1 64/2009. it is stated that on credible information received, that complainant visited the land of the petitioner, bearing Survey No.206/2, Plot No.26 of Muchakhandi village, Bagalkot Taluk and found “ganja plants” in the land, of 2 to 3 feet height and weighing 6 kgs., 500 grams. On the basis of which a First Information Report was registered for having cultivated and grown the said plant. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the District and Sessions Judge. Bagalkot and a case was registered in Special Case No.23/2010. The petitioner had ultimately surrendered before the Court and submitted an application for grant of bail and the same was rejected. He was taken into judicial custody. It is in this background, that the petitioner is before this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, in so far as the description of the material seized as “ganja plant” is inexplicable. The Act defines “ganja” as, the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops, by whatever name they may be known or designated. In that view of the matter, the allegation that ganja was seized weighing 6 kgs., and 500 grams, valued at Rs.6,500/- per kg. and he would submit that the allegation cannot be sustained. As the definition of cannabis plant etc. is specific and unless it is made clear as to what exactly was seized from the petitioner and how much it weighed, the charge cannot be brought home. Therefore on that ground alone he would submit that the petitioner has made out a case for enlargement on bail. 2. Though the learned Government Pleader has sought to make an improvement in referring to what was seized, as the cannabis plant taking cue from the argument put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the previous occasion. The Police complaint itself containing such an erroneous 4 description of the material that was seized and weighed. the petitioner has made out a case for enlargement on bail. The petition is therefore allowed, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions: 1) He shall furnish a personal bond for a sum of25,OOO/-, with a solvent surety for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 2) He shall make himself available to the Investigation Officer as and when required for the purposes of investigation. 3) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without seeking leave of that Court. 4) He shall not seek to induce or threaten the prosecution witnesses. 5) He shall attend the trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail subject to the Court granting exemption for good and valid reason. Sd& Rsh 3UDGE