IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7808/2017 BETWEEN:
Sri Dinesh H R S/o Rajappa Aged about 36 years R/at No.122/1, Gopal Circle Kushal Nagar Kodagu-571 234. ... PETITIONER (By Sri Prashanth M, Adv. for Sri Vishwajith Shetty S, Adv.) AND:
State of Karnataka Malleswaram Police Bengaluru Represented by the State Public Prosecutor High Court Buildings Bengaluru-560 001. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.140/2017 of Malleshwaram P.S., Bengaluru, for the offence P/U/S 420 read with Section 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the offence punishable under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent police station Crime No.140/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the complaint averments are that, during the year 2012, one Smt.Sneha was the colleague of the complainant in the complainant’s hospital. Said Sneha introduced her relatives Mr.Praveen Kumar, Mr.T.Kallappa and Mr.Dinesh to the complainant and those three persons were doing financial business in the name and style of Nischit Finance Pvt. Ltd., Said persons persuaded the complainant to invest money in their financial organization and promised that they will return the amount within 2-4 months and she will continue to get profit from her investment. Accordingly, the complainant deposited a total amount of Rs.1,30,00,000/- through cheques in the above mentioned financial organization and the said organization issued cheques for the security of invested money. But the said persons have failed to give any profit to the complainant since July 2016 and they absconded. On the basis of the said complaint, case was registered for the alleged offence.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.2 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4. The prosecution material so also, the contents of the complaint prima facie shows that the transaction is in between the complainant and accused No.1 and the present petitioner is working as an agent in the real estate business of Kallappa and he is getting commission and he is not concerned with the financial business in between the complainant and accused No.1.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since accused No.1 has left the address and petitioner continued to reside in Kushalnagar, repeatedly the complainant approached the petitioner and there might have been quarrel between the two and the petitioner might have advised the complainant to not to come to his house and this may be the reason for involving the petitioner in this case.
6. The petitioner has contended in the petition that he is innocent and not committed the alleged offence and there is a false implication. He has undertaken to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by this Court. The offence under section 420 of IPC is triable by the Magistrate Court and not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, I am of the opinion that petitioner can be granted with anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-Police are directed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 420 r/w Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent police station Crime No.140/2017, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and shall furnish one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner shall make himself available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when called for and to cooperate with the further investigation.
iv. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute the personal bond and the surety bond.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp