CRL.P/104479/2025 of SHINGADI S/O MALLAPPA HIREKODI Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 21 January 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.104479 OF 2025

(439 (CR.PC)/483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

SHINGADI S/O MALLAPPA HIREKODI,

AGE: 44 YRS

OCC: AGRICULTURE

R/O: NIDAGUNDI

TQ: RAIBAG

DIST: BELAGAVI – 591 317.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. GIRISH A YADAWAD, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA,

REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD

THROUGH RAIBAG POLICE DIST

BELAGAVI – 591 317.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)

***

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439

OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS, 2023), PRAYING

TO, RELEASE THE PETITIONER (ACCUSED NO.1) ON REGULAR

BAIL IN RESPECT OF RAIBAG PS CRIME NO. 0226/2025

REGISTERED BY THE RAIBAG POLICE STATION AGAINST

PETITIONER (ACCUSED NO.1) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC.

20(a), 20(b) (ii), (C) OF NDPS ACT, 1985 PENDING ON THE

FILE OF II ADDL. DIST AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND

RESERVED

ON

18.12.2025,

COMING

ON

FOR

PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CAV ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)

1.

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for grant of regular bail in Crime No.226/2025 of respondent/Police for the offence under Sections 20(a), 20(b) (ii), (C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘NDPS’

Act)

Brief facts of the case;

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 13.09.2025

at about 6.30 am, the complainant along with a police constable who are on patrolling duty had received an information that ganja plants were grown in the sugarcane land bearing Sy.No.103/3+4 of Nidagundi Village. After confirming that the ganja plants were grown in the said land, the complainant has secured the panchas and also the staffs and lodged the case against the owner of the land. After registering the case, investigation was conducted. During investigation, they uprooted the ganja plants. There were 205 ganja plants were grown in the sugarcane land which was weighing about 441 kg and 830 gms, worth of Rs.22,09,150/-. The investigation is under progress.

3.

Heard Sri.Girish A Yadawad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Praveena Y Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State.

4.

It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that, the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence.

He was not aware about the ganja plants which were grown in the said sugarcane land. It is, in fact, alleged ganja plants were grown in the said land, actually, land does not belongs to the petitioner. However, he has been falsely implicated in this case.

5.

It is further submitted that the complainant and his team without verifying the RTC properly, implicated the petitioner, as accused which amounts to abuse of process of law. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such submissions, learned counsel prays to allow the petition.

6.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State vehemently submitted that, in all 205 ganja plants were there in the sugarcane land. Growing the ganja plants itself is an offence. From the investigation, it appears that, the petitioner herein was taking care of the land,

and he has grown the said plants with an intention to sell it to the customers and also to gain unlawfully, it is not appropriate to grant him bail. Making such submissions, learned HCGP for respondent – State prays to reject the petition.

7.

Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the averments of the records available, it appears that, the petitioner is not a land owner.

However, during investigation it has revealed that, the petitioner was looking after the land and there were 205 ganja plants which were grown in the sugarcane land and those plants were uprooted by the Authority in the presence of the witnesses.

8.

Having considered the seriousness of the offences and also the impact on the Society, it is not appropriate to grant the bail. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: