IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1095/2019 BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Aswathnarayana, S/o. K.Srinivasa Rao, Aged about 48 years, R/at No.572 Sivamma, 2nd Cross, NGEF Layout, Nagarabhavi, Bengaluru-560072.
2. Sri. Jayaramaiah, S/o. G.Giriyappa, Aged about 51 years, R/at No.263, EWS 5th Cross, 2nd Main Road, 2dn Stage, KHB Layout, Basaveshwara Nagar, Bengaluru-560079. ...Petitioners (By Sri. P.Prasanna Kumar, Advocate for Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By Peenya Police Station, Yeswanthapura Sub-Division, Bengaluru.
Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondent (By Smt. Namitha Mahesh B.G, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.564/2018 of Peenya Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence P/U/S 418, 406 and 420 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.564/2018 of Peenya Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 406 and 420 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the petitioners-accused Nos. 1 and 2 were running a TPC Techno Power Corporation and availed a loan from the Complainant-Punjab National Bank (‘the Bank’ for short) to the tune of Rs.16.00 Crores and the said loan was guaranteed by the corporate guarantee of M/s. Skill Tech Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd., and a property bearing Registration No.25A1 was also given by way of equitable mortgage. It is further alleged that after obtaining a loan, by creating an equitable mortgage in favour of the Bank, the said property was sold by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for petitioners that the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are innocent, they have not committed any offences as alleged against them and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 have paid an amount of Rs.11.00 Crores to the Bank with up to date interest and they have also given a letter to the Bank expressing their willingness to repay the entire amount without seeking any concessions and thereby closing the loan account. He further submitted that another partner, who was the partner of the said firm has sold the said property after the equitable mortgage by fabricating the signature of the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2, in this regard, a complaint has also been registered against the partner in Peenya Police Station. He further submitted that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are ready to co-operate with the investigation and ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed on them by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are absconding since from the date of the registration. They have created an equitable mortgage and subsequently, they have sold the property bearing Registration No.25A1, situated in Peenya Phase-2, without there being any intimation to the Bank. The said act of the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 clearly indicates that they were intending to cheat the Bank by raising a huge loan amount. He further submitted that the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 have raised a huge loan amount and they have not repaid the said amount, if the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are enlarged on bail, they may abscond and they may not be available for the trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and perused the records.
7. By going through the contents of the complaint and other materials, it indicates that the petitioners-accused Nos. 1 and 2 Company has obtained a loan from the Bank and an equitable mortgage has been created in respect of the property bearing Registration No.25A1 situated at Peenya Phase-2 and subsequently, the said property was sold without any intimation to the Bank. It is the specific case of the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 that they are ready to repay the entire amount without seeking any concession and it is also the specific case of the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 that it is one of the partner who has sold the property by fabricating the signature of the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 and a case has been registered in this behalf.
Under the said facts and circumstances of the case, when the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioners-accused Nos. 1 and 2 are enlarged on bail, then it is going to meet the ends of justice.
In that light, criminal petition is allowed and the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.564/2018 of Peenya Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 406 and 420 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
1. Each of the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) each with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
2. They shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from today.
3. They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
4. They shall mark their attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., to 5.00 p.m., before the concerned police station till the charge sheet is filed.
5. They should be regular in attending the Court.
6. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
Sd/- JUDGE HA/-