Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Metilda Elizabeth W/O Frankling vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|25 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.9051/2018 BETWEEN:
Smt. Metilda Elizabeth W/o Frankling Aged about 54 years R/at No.1034, Kacharakanahalli Hennur Main Road Thomas Town Post Bengaluru-560 084.
(By Sri N.Shivakumar, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka by Kadugondana Halli Police Station Bengaluru.
through the State Public Prosecutor High Court Building Dr. Ambedkar Veedhi Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) …Petitioner … Respondent 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 Crime No.529/2018 of Kadugondana Halli Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408 and 468 of Indian Penal Code.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day the Court made the following:-
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/ accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to release her on anticipatory bail in Crime No.529/2018 of Kadugondana Halli police station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 468 of Indian Penal Code.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the complainant is the Principal of Sneha College of Nursing. It is alleged that the petitioner/accused came and approached the Principal that she can bring the students from Kerala and Tamil Nadu and as such she has been appointed only an Administrator in charge of her college for getting the students admitted. It is further alleged that she collected Rs.60,000/- from each students and misappropriated an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- and thereby cheated the complainant College. On the basis of the said complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused that the petitioner/accused brought and got admitted the students by submitting the original documents and as the said students were not got admitted, they filed writ petition and as per the orders of this Court they were got admitted and even after completion of their degree the original records were not returned and the complainant started demanding more money and as such the complaint was registered against the complainant, her husband and present petitioner in Crime No.120/2018. In the said case already they were released on bail. He further submitted that no documents have been produced to show that petitioner/accused misappropriated an amount of Rs.50,00,000/-. He further submitted that now only with an intention to harass the petitioner/accused a private complaint has been registered and on the basis of the private complaint, the Court has referred the case to the jurisdictional police and the jurisdictional police have registered the case to apprehend the petitioner. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. She is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer the sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused has misappropriated an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- by collecting the said amount from the students and having not credited the same to the account of the College. He further submitted that still investigation is in progress and petitioner/accused is absconding and if she is released on anticipatory bail, she may not co-operate with the investigation and she may tamper with the prosecution evidence and she may abscond. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. On perusal of the records it shows that complaint has been registered against the complainant and the present petitioner and her husband in Crime No.120/2018 of Kadugondana Halli Police Station and she has been already released on bail in the said complaint. It is alleged that the said accused persons have taken an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- and they have not returned the original documents in spite of completing their course. Even though the present complaint has been filed alleging that petitioner/accused has misappropriated an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- by collecting Rs.60,000/- from each of the students out of 80 students. That is the matter which has been considered and appreciated only at the time of trial. Already charge sheet has been filed in Crime No.120/2018 as against three accused persons and it may be due to over come the said aspect the present complaint might also been filed. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the apprehension of the learned High Court Government Pleader can be protected by imposing some stringent conditions.
8. In the light of the discussions held by me above, the petition is allowed and petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in Crime No.529/2018 of Kadugondana Halli Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 468 of Indian Penal Code, subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
ii) She shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from today.
iii) She shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iv) She shall mark her attendance in the jurisdictional police once in 15 days between 10.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M. till the charge sheet is filed.
v) She shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
Sd/- JUDGE *AP/-
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

Smt Metilda Elizabeth W/O Frankling vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
25 February, 2019
Judges
  • B A Patil