IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3238/2019 BETWEEN:
1. KUMARASWAMY T.P., S/O H.PUTTARANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 2. JYOTHI S.B., W/O KUMARASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS, ADARSHANAGARA, TUMKUR – 572 103.
KARNATAKA.
(BY SRI.LAKSHMIKANTH K., ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY TUMKUR POLICE STATION, TUMKUR.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE – 01.
(BY SRI. K.P.YOGANNA, HCGP) ... PETITIONERS ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.54/2019 OF TUMAKURU TOWN POLICE STATION, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 419, 417, 420, 462, 506 R/W S.34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR. DN.) & CJM COURT, TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. Perused the records.
2. It is a very peculiar case wherein the father of the petitioner No.1 has lodged a complaint. It is stated therein that complainant is a retired Health Inspector. He has deposited all his retiral benefits in two banks i.e. in SBI Vinayaknagar Branch and DCC Bank. The entire amount was transferred to the account of his wife Mangala Gowramma. In this context it is alleged that the accused persons i.e. the petitioners herein, without the knowledge of the wife of the complainant and as well as the complainant have concocted the documents and without their permission, have taken the entire amount of Rs.16,75,029/- from the above said two bank accounts by various dubious methods. It is alleged that when it was questioned by the complainant, the petitioners have threatened him with dire consequences.
3. Serious allegations have been made against the first petitioner herein who is none other than the son of the complainant. The second petitioner, because is the wife of first petitioner she might have also been made as a party in the private complaint. The said complaint was referred to the police for investigation and the police are investigating the matter by registering a case in Crime No.54/2019, for the offences under Sections 419, 417, 420, 462 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
4. Looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, in my opinion, 2nd petitioner being a lady, custodial investigation is not required in her case. However, forgery is alleged as against petitioner No.1 and he is the root cause for removing the entire amount from the account of the complainant and his wife. Therefore, accused No.1 is not entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Hence the following:
ORDER The petition is dismissed so far as petitioner No.1 is concerned.
The petition is allowed so far as petitioner No.2 is concerned. Consequently, the petitioner No.2 shall be released on bail in the event of her arrest in connection with Crime No.54/2019 of Tumkur Town Police Station, on following conditions:-
i) The petitioner No.2 shall surrender herself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and she shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/Jurisdictional Court.
ii) The petitioner No.2 shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner No.2 shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation, and she shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner No.2 shall not leave the jurisdiction of Tumukuru District without prior permission of the I.O. / Court, till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE sac*