IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY CRIMINAL PETITION No.665 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SRI. CHETHAN N S/O. NAGARAJU N.T.
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS NARASIPURA, DASANAPURA HOBLI MATHAHALLI, BENGALURU – 562 123 AND:
(BY SRI A.R.NAVEEN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI NIRANJAN K., ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER STATE BY SOLADEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING HIGH COURT BENGALURU – 560 001 (BY SRI NASRULLAKHAN, HCGP) …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 CR.NO.358/2018 OF SOLADEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 408, 418, 420, 468, 477-A, 120-B R/W SEC.34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking his enlargement on anticipatory bail in Crime No.358/2018 on the file of the respondent/Police for the offences punishable under Sections 408, 418, 420, 468, 477A, 120B read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. Heard both side on the petition. In spite of granting sufficient time, the prosecution has not filed its statement of objection to the petition.
3. It is alleged in the F.I.R that the accused named therein as Accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 who does not include the present petitioner were all working in a hospital by name Sapthagiri Institute of Medical and Research Centre, Hesaraghatta Main Road, Bengaluru in different capacities including in billing section and they were involved in creating original bills of higher amount and used to collect the entire amount from the patient and thereafter, generating false bills for lesser amounts and taking credit of the said lesser amount to the accounts of the hospital and thus, have misappropriated more than a sum of `3 crores during the year 2011-2018 till the alleged crime came to light in the audit of the hospital.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner in his arguments, submitted that admittedly, the name of the present petitioner is not shown in the complaint and no overt-act is alleged against him. It is only upon the alleged voluntary statement of one of the accused, the Police are seriously searching for the present petitioner for apprehending him. As such, the petitioner has got an apprehension of arrest in an offence which he has not committed at all.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that voluntary statement of the accused is the only source for suspecting the present petitioner.
6. In the light of the above statements made from both sides and considering the fact, it can be noticed that the complainant despite having the entire records available with him to ascertain the details of the persons who were alleged to have been involved in the alleged crime, has not named the present petitioner in the F.I.R for the reasons best known to him. Secondly, even according to the prosecution, the apprehension of the accused for an effective investigation is also not warranted in the present circumstances of the case.
7. Considering the nature of allegations and the alleged overt act against the present petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner be granted anticipatory bail. However, the apprehension of the prosecution that the accused may flee from justice can be checked by imposing suitable restrictions / conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. In the event the petitioner is arrested by Soladevanahalli Police Station, in Cr.No.358/2018, for the offences punishable under Sections 408, 418, 420, 468, 477A, 120B read with Section 34 of IPC, he shall be enlarged on the relief of anticipatory bail, subject to the conditions:
i) That he shall execute a personal bond for sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the enlarging authority.
ii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every first and third Thursday of the month between 9.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m., and mark his attendance till the investigation is completed and final report is filed.
iii) He shall not hamper and tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
iv) He shall voluntarily appear before the jurisdictional Magistrate before whom the matter is pending, within three weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE bnv