IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8787 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
K C JAYANTH S/O CHANDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS KANNASANDRA VILLAGE CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT—571501.
(By Sri: VIJAYAKUMAR S C, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA CHANNAPATNA RURAL POLICE STATION CHANNAPATNA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-571501.
(By Sri: B.J.ESHWARAPPA, HCGP) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETR. ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR. NO.279/2016 OF CHANNAPATNA RURAL P.S., RAMANAGARA, WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406,420 R/W 149 OF IPC. THE III ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., RAMANAGARA HAS REJECTED THE BAIL PETITION ON 4.11.2016 IN CRL. MISC. NO.641/2016.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard.
2. This petition is filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C., for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in Cr.No.279/2016 registered by the respondent - Police under sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code.
3. The Secretary of Channapatna Crafts Park lodged a complaint alleging that the petitioner herein was appointed as Accountant in their Society and from 2013 to August 2016, he mis-appropriated a sum of Rs.9,23,005/-. The application in Crl.Misc.No.641/2016 moved by the petitioner under section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been rejected by the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara, vide order dated 4.11.2016, on the ground that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for the purpose of investigation and that in the event the petitioner is granted bail, it would encourage other officials who are in the habit of mis-appropriating funds of the Government Institutions.
4. Looking to the nature of the allegations made in the complaint, it is seen that the allegations made against the petitioner could be substantiated by documentary evidence which would be available with the complainant himself and under the said circumstances, custodial interrogation may not be necessary. If for any reason, the Investigating Officer considers the presence of the petitioner necessary for the purpose of interrogation for effecting any further recoveries, the petitioner could be put on terms to make himself available for the said purpose. Hence, having regard to all the above facts and circumstances of the case, in order to expedite the investigation, I would deem it proper to admit the petitioner to bail, subject to conditions. Hence, the following order:-
Criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of this order on any working day between 9.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. and the Investigating Officer shall interrogate the petitioner on the same day and shall enlarge him on bail on the same day on obtaining a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties for the likesum and subject to the further condition that the petitioner shall mark his attendance in Channapatna Rural Police Station on the last Sunday of every calendar month until completion of the investigation and further the petitioner shall not intermeddle with the investigation and shall not allure the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
Sd/- JUDGE Bss.