IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8295 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
SRI.ARUN KUMAR P, S/O M.PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.132, BAKSHI GARDEN, COTTON PET, BENGALURU – 560 053.
(BY SRI.DILRAJ ROHIT SEQUEIRA, ADV.,) AND:
THE STATE BY THE HALASOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE – 560 001.
... PETITIONER …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 CRIME NO.365/2009 OF HALASUR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406, 408 420 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. It appears that the petitioner was working as an agent under the complainant ie., styled as R.P. Agencies situated at Nos.42-46, Sri Nanjamma Complex, 1st Floor, ‘G’ Street, Jogupalya, Halasuru, Bengaluru City. The said agency was dealing with the medicines. This petitioner and some other persons were appointed as agents-cum- representatives and they used to collect the medicines from the agency and they distribute it to different agencies and collect the money and they have to pay that money or deposit to the complainant – agency. In the year 2009, alleging that the petitioner and others have not deposited the said amount for the period of 2008 and lodged a complaint. After lodgment of complaint making such allegations, police have registered a case in Crime No.365/2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408 and 420 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
3. Infact one of the accused was arrested and some amount was recovered. Other accused persons including this petitioner were not available. Therefore, showing them as absconded, charge sheet came to be filed in the year 2014 after long lapse of four years. There is nothing available on record to show that at any point of time registration of the case was intimated to the petitioner and he had any knowledge about investigation and as well as charge sheet is being filed before the Court.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that on various occasions, the trial Court has issued Non Bailable Warrant, but, inspite of that accused could not be secured.
5. It is the contention of the petitioner’s counsel that the petitioner was very much present in his residence, but, he did not receive any summons or warrant from the Court and he being a dutiful citizen of the Country and he was abide by legal procedures. Therefore, he requests the Court to give him an opportunity to abide by law, by imposing stringent conditions till the disposal of the case.
6. In the absence of any other material to show that the petitioner was having knowledge of the pendency of the petition, in my opinion one opportunity may be given to the petitioner by imposing stringent conditions.
7. Looking from the above said facts and the materials available on record, the offences alleged are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. There is a specific allegation as to the amount that the petitioner was due to the agency ie., quantified as `16,675/-. Therefore, considering the amount involved in the case, in my opinion, by imposing stringent conditions, petitioner be enlarged on bail. 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.365/2009 of Halasoor Police Station, subject to the following conditions:-
i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within Ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and he shall execute his personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court, till the case registered against him is disposed of.
iv) If necessary, the petitioner on request by the Investigating Officer has to appear before the Investigating Officer, have further investigation, if any, and to co-operate with the Investigation for the purpose of filing any additional charge sheet in connection with this case.
v) The Petitioner is also hereby directed to mark his attendance once in 15 days before the Investigating Officer for a period of one month.
Sd/- JUDGE GH