Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Divyan Vivekanandan @ Stephen vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|28 September, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6797/2017 BETWEEN:
DIVYAN VIVEKANANDAN @ STEPHEN THOMAS @ DINESH S/O. LATE VIVEKANAND, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.3, HOUSE NO.3053, 5TH FLOOR, PRESTIGE KENSINGTON GARDEN APARTMENTS, CORNWALL BLOCK, HMT MAIN ROAD, JALAHALLI, BANGALORE-560013.
(BY SRI.HASHMATH PASHA, ADV.,) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION, BANGALORE.
INVESTIGATED BY CCB POLICE (OCW) BANGALORE-560101 REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.
(BY SRI K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP.,) …PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.331/2017 OF CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 66(C) AND 66 (D) OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 AND SECTIONS 420, 468, 471 OF IPC AND ETC., THIS CRL.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
2. This petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.331/2017 registered by the respondent police station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 of IPC and Sections 66(C) and 66 (D) of Information Technology Act. The alleged incident is dated 21.06.2017. On that day, two persons came to the shop of the complainant situated at Konanakunte Cross and purchased three LED TVs. After billing, they swiped their debit card for Rs.1,10,000/-. Though immediately, the swipe card showed the credit, but subsequently, the complainant came to know that an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- was not credited to his account. Therefore, he made a complaint.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that entire investigation has been completed and charge sheet is filed. There remains nothing to be recovered from the petitioner and therefore, in the circumstances, they are entitled to bail.
4. On perusal of the complaint, it can be said that the question of identity of the accused is also involved and it has to be established during trial. The investigation is completed. All the offences are triable by the Magistrate. There is no impediment for granting bail and therefore, the following:
ORDER Petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) and providing two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court and he is subjected to the following conditions:
i) He shall appear before the trial Court regularly;
ii) He shall not threaten the witness nor tamper with the prosecution evidence.
Sd/-
JUDGE BSV
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Divyan Vivekanandan @ Stephen vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
28 September, 2017
Judges
  • Sreenivas Harish Kumar