IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4688/2019 BETWEEN:
M.WILLIAMS, S/O M.A.MICHEAL, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/A NO.2015, OLD K.R.NAGARA ROAD, HUNSUR TOWN, MYSURU DISTRICT – 571 105.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI.K.A.CHANDRASHEKARA, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE POLICE OF HUNSUR TOWN POLICE STATION, MYSURU DISTRICT – 571 105.
REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU – 560 001.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI.K.P.YOGANNA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.85/2019 OF HUNSUR TOWN P.S., MYSURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406, 417, 418, 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 OF IPC AND SEC.29, 45 OD ADVOCATES ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.
2. The allegations against the petitioner is that he was posing himself as an advocate enrolled himself in Enrollment No.KAR/412/1986. He has been practicing at Hunsur Court since 33 years. Suspecting that he has not been enrolled in the Bar Council, a person by name Mr. Vimal Nathan, practicing advocate at Bengaluru, lodged a complaint before the respondent-police who have registered the same in Crime No.85/2019 for offences punishable under Sections 406, 417, 418, 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 of IPC and under Section 29 read with Section 45 of Advocate Act. On verification of the said enrollment number, the police found that the same stands in the name of Smt. Upanal Vijayalakshmi Sangappa of Hunagund Taluk, who was working as District Judge. It is also alleged that the police have also received confirmation from the Bar Council that the said enrollment number belonged to Smt. Upanal Vijayalakshmi Sangappa of Hunagund Taluk. On the above said grounds, it is alleged that the petitioner has cheated the Bar Council, lawyers profession and also the litigants at large for having practiced for more than 33 years as an advocate. Therefore, a criminal case has been registered under the provisions noted above.
3. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after registration of the case, the petitioner has not been practicing and he has realized the repercussions of registration of the case. The above said offences have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt during the course of full dressed trial.
4. In the above facts and circumstances of the case as the alleged offences are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life, it is just and necessary to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner by imposing stringent conditions.
5. Hence, the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.85/2019 of Hunsur Town Police Station, Mysuru District, on following conditions:-
i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the concerned Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and he shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like- sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation, and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week ie, on every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
Sd/- JUDGE *alb/-.