IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3184/2019 Between:
Mr. Binu Mathew, Son of George J Mathew, Aged about 54 years, Residing at No.490, 1st Floor, Right Wing, Venkateshwara Manor, 80 Feet Road, HMT Layout, R.T.Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 003. …Petitioner (By Sri. Joshna Hudson Samuel, Advocate) And:
State of Karnataka, By Bellandur Police, Represented by, State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru -560 001. …Respondent (By Sri. Nasrulla Khan,HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 (1)(b) of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to (a) Set aside the order dated 25.04.2019 passed by the LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Bengaluru (CCH-61) in Criminal Misc.No.3507/2019. (b) Grant the relief of relax ing the condition No.3 and 5 contained in the Anticipatory bail order dated 04.02.2019 passed in Criminal Misc.No.611/2019 passed by the LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Bangalore (CCH-61).
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The present petition is filed by the petitioner with a prayer to set-aside the conditions No.3 and 5 imposed in the anticipatory bail order dated 04.02.2019 passed in Crl.Misc.No.611/2019 by the LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-61).
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader representing the respondent-State.
3. On the basis of a private complaint filed against RoomsTonite eBookings Private Limited/IDS Next Business Solutions Private Limited represented by its Directors, the learned Magistrate referred the matter for investigation and accordingly, a case in Crime No.514/2018 was registered by Bellanduru Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections Information Technology Act 2000 (U/s-66,43); IPC 1860 (U/s-120B); Information Technology Act 2000 (U/s-66(c)); IPC 1860 (U/s-34); Information Technology Act 2000 (U/s-66D)); IPC 1860 (U/s-464, 420, 406).
4. The petitioner is said to be one of the Directors of the aforesaid Company. Apprehending arrest, he filed Crl.Misc.No.611/2019 seeking anticipatory bail and the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 04.02.2019, granted anticipatory bail with the following conditions:
i. The petitioners shall appear before the respondent police on or before 19th February 2019 for the purpose of investigation.
ii. The petitioner shall not tamper or hamper with the prosecution witnesses.
iii. The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent police and to give attendance on every month 2nd and 4th Sunday between 10.00am to 5.00pm till filing of charge sheet.
iv. The petitioners shall co-operate with the fair investigation of the case by the Investigation Agency by producing documents.
v. The petitioners should not leave the jurisdiction of Bengaluru without prior permission of the Court.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner being one of the Directors of the company has business interest at several places across India as well as abroad. The company has been providing services to about four thousand hotel customers all over the world and therefore, by imposing conditions No.3 and 5, the petitioner has been put to great hardship as he has been prevented from traveling outside Bengaluru. Accordingly, he seeks to relax the conditions imposed by the learned Sessions Judge while granting anticipatory bail.
6. The learned High Court Government pleader opposes the prayer of the petitioner contending that the investigation is still pending and the petitioner is required for investigation and accordingly, he seeks to dismiss the petition.
7. The petitioner filed Crl.Misc.No.3507/2019 seeking relaxation of the aforesaid conditions. However, the learned Sessions Judge on the ground that he was already permitted to leave the jurisdiction of Bengaluru for a period of twenty days and he having been given ample opportunity, is not entitled for any further relaxation of the said conditions and also observing that the petitioner is not interested to co-operate with the investigation, dismissed the said petition.
8. The case has been registered on the basis of a private complaint. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the case is purely of civil nature. The petitioner is one of the Directors of the company and according to him and he has business throughout India as well as abroad. There is no allegation that the petitioner is not co-operating with the investigation of the case. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate that the petitioner may be permitted to leave the jurisdiction of Bengaluru for a period of three months for the present. Accordingly I pass the following:-
ORDER 1. The petition is allowed.
2. Condition Nos. 3 and 5 imposed in Crl.Misc.No.611/2019 dated 04.02.2019, on the file of the Court of the LX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH 61) is relaxed for a period of three months from today.
3. The petitioner shall abide by all other conditions.
In view of the dismissal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2019 is disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE DS