IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO.6307/2019 BETWEEN K.S. SARATH KUMAR S/O KARUNAKARAN AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O SHISHIRAM, THRITHUMMULA PALIYARAKONAM POST THIRUVANANTHAPURAM KERALA – 695 573 (BY SRI. SIJI MALAYIL, ADVOCATE) AND ... PETITIONER THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MANGALURU NORTH POLICE STATION BENGALURU – 575 001 REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING OPP. TO CUBBON PARK BENGALURU – 560 001 … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.31/2015 (SPL.CASE NO.68/2018) OF MANGALURU NORTH POLICE STATION, MANGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 415, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 406, 409, 120B R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 9 OF KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST AND DEPOSITORS ESTABLISHMENT ACT, 2004.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION 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. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.10 in the charge sheet filed by the respondent-police and the same was culminated in Special Case No.68/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 415, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 406, 409, 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC, now pending before the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K.
3. The brief factual matrix of the case are that, Accused Nos. 1 to 5 being the Directors of M/s. Maitry Plantation and Horticulture Pvt. Ltd., Ongola Praksham Village, Andra Pradesh, had given publications through media and their agents, and thereby they induced the public to invest money in their Company, assuring the investors that, they would pay attractive interest and house sites to the investors on maturity of their amount invested. Thereafter they have cheated the public by not even returning their money and not giving any incentives as assured by them. The complainant is also one of such investors, who has filed a private complaint against the accused persons before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K. and the said private complaint was referred to the jurisdictional police for investigation. After investigation, the concerned police have filed charge sheet.
4. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner’s name does not find a place in the private complaint, though he is also one of the Directors of the said company, as such, the role of the present petitioner in the alleged incident has to be established during the course of full dressed trial.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner (A.10) submitted that, Accused No.9- Mohan Kumar Kalmady, who is also stated to be one of such similarly placed Directors of the alleged company, against whom same allegations are made, and who also stands on the same footing as that of this petitioner (A.10), has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 27.03.2019 passed in Criminal Petition No.931/2019. Hence, on the ground of parity, this petitioner (A.10) is also entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, the petitioner (A.10) is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following,-
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner (A.10) shall be released on bail in connection with Special Case No.68/2018 (Crime No.31/2015 of Respondent-Mangaluru North Police Station, Mangaluru District), for the offence punishable under Sections 415, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 406, 409, 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC, now pending before the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Mangaluru, D.K., subject to the following conditions.
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission, till the case registered against him is disposed of.
KGR* Sd/-
JUDGE