ATRUMISSA HASSAN MOHAMMAD KHAN Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Applicant, apprehending arrest in a case under Section 407 r/w 34 I. P. C. , seeks anticipatory bail. A complaint was lodged on 25-11-1996 by Coastal Roadways Ltd. alleging that steel billets of M/s Marmagoa Steel Ltd. Curtorim, Salcete-Goa, were loaded in truck No. MCU-5979 driven by Suresh Yadav, which is owned by the present Applicant, but the said vehicle has not reached the destination at Gujrat. THE police have arrested the son of the Applicant who is stated to be the cleaner on the said truck as well as the second driver of the truck whereas Suresh Yadav is absconding. It appears that during the course of hearing of bail application before learned Sessions Judge, Margao, of son of the Applicant and/the other driver who has been arrested, it was represented that the owner of the truck, namely, the Applicant, could not be arrested and, according to Investigating Officer, the Sessions Judge, Margao directed him to arrest the Applicant. THEse facts are also mentioned by the Investigation Officer in the Reply which has been filed before me.

(2.) LEARNED Advocate Shri U. S. Kolwalkar, appearing on behalf of the Applicant, states that the truck in question on the relevant dates was at Baroda and he has produced some carbon copies of documents to substantiate his contention. He, therefore, contends that the Applicant should be released on anticipatory bail under the circumstances, since the police on instructions from the learned Sessions Judge, Margao, want to arrest the Applicant. Investigating Officer was heard since no Public Prosecutor has been appointed so far. The Investigating Officer states that the whereabouts of main accused Suresh Yadav are known to the Applicant alone and for that purpose she is required to be taken in custody.

(3.) APPLICATION is allowed accordingly. APPLICATION allowed. ________________ .