IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHAR WAD DATED THIS THE I9 DAY OF APRIL, 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRL.P. NO.10459/2011 BETWEEN: B. RAMASUBBA REDDY, S/O SHRI.B.CHAIDRASEKHAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, BASEWAR, BADAVANE, HOSPET. PETITIONER (BY SRI.RAVIND D.KULKARNI, ADV.) AND: 1. STATE OF LARNATAKA, (REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR). 2. THE P.S.1.. ANKOLA POLICE STAT1ON, (REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VINAYAK KULKARNI. HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS PILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL ON THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.189/2010, ANKOLA POLICE STATION REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 406 AND 379 IPC. THiS PETITION COMiNG ON FOR ORDES THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: a 2 t ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State in respect of the anticipatory bail sought for by the petitioner. 2. The prosecution case in short is that, on taking • note of the newspaper publication dated 02.06.2010, Assistant Conservator of Forest went to Belikere Port and seized the iron ore and it was found to be only 2 lakh Metric Tons and as per the investigation, nearly 50,800 M.Tons iron ore had been stealthily exported. Thus there was loss caused to the exchequer and the petitioner being the Executive Director of MIs Salagaonkar Mining Industries Ltd., is therefore, responsible for the loss of iron ore. 3. Accordingly, a complaint was filed with the police and the case was booked against 11 companies. Thereafter, one more report was filed before the learned JMFC in which, 45 more companies were mentioned as accused for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 379 r/w Section 34 of [PC. 3 p 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the persons who were similarly placed like petitioner having granted anticipatory bail by this Court and referring to the order passed in Crl.P.No.5006/2010 and other cases and also Crl.P.No.7770/2010 and other cases, sought for anticipatory bail to the present petitioner also on the ground of parity. 5. Taking note of the above submission put forward and the objections filed by the respondent-State and also on perusal of the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.5006/20l0 and other cases as well as the order passed in Crl.P.No.7770/2010 and other cases, as the present petitioner is also similarly placed with those who were granted anticipatory bail, I see no reason as to why the petitioner should not be granted the same relief on the ground of parity. Hence, I pass the following order: 6. The petition is allowed subject to the following conditions. 4 The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer and in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing self bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- along with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. 2. He shall cooperate with the 1.0. during investigation of the case by appearing before him as and when required for the purpose of investigation. 3. He shall produce before the 1.0., the documents showing his permanent residential address. 4. He shall also produce before the 1.0. the names and addresses of the person!s responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the company. 5. He shall also produce before the 1.0. such documents pertaining to the company as would be rcquired the 1.0. for the purpose of investigation. 6. He shall produce the names and permanent addresses of the Managing Director and other Directors of his company, so as to enable the 1.0. to interrogate them, if necessary, during investigation of the ease. 7. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of trial Court, without prior permission of the Investigating Officer/Court concerned. sal MBS