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

Sri Madhu S vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|01 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6677/2018 BETWEEN :
Sri Madhu S., S/o Sri Seetharamaiah Aged about 42 years No.1/1, 1st Cross, 1st Main R.T. Street (M.T.Street) Bengaluru-560 053.
(By Sri Arjun Ajay, Advocate for Sri D.Prabhakar, Advocate) AND :
State of Karnataka By Police Sub-Inspector Yelahanka Police Station Yelahanka Sub Division Bengaluru City-560 064.
(By Smt. Namitha Mahesh B.G., 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.167/2018 of Yelahanka Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 406 and 506 r/w. Section 34 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 is filed by accused No.5 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to release him on anticipatory bail in Crime No.167/2018 of Yelahanka Police Station pending on the file of IV Additional CMM, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 406, 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent- State.
3. It is alleged in the complaint that accused Nos.1 and 2 at the intervention of other accused persons agreed to lend a loan of Rs.30,00,000/- to the complainant and as security for the said loan he was forced to execute registered agreement of sale and GPA, dated 29.7.2017 in favour of accused No.2. It is further alleged that accused Nos.1 and 2 let only Rs.1,00,000/- out of the agreed amount of Rs.30,00,000/- and fraudulently accused No.2 executed sale deed of the said site in favour of herself on 12.9.2017 and thereby cheated the complainant.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that already accused Nos.1 and 2 have been released on bail and all the documents were recovered from the possession of accused No.1. He further submitted that petitioner is an advocate and he was shown as an accused when the complaint was given on 4.4.2018 and subsequently case was registered on the second complaint on 11.7.2018 and at that time, he has been shown as accused No.5. He further submitted that the petitioner has given only an opinion after verifying the documents. No other overt acts have been alleged as against the petitioner-accused No.5. Petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. on these grounds he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that along with the other accused persons the petitioner-accused No.5 is also involved in the said transactions and he has advised and prepared the documents. All the accused persons are standing in equal footing and as such the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
7. Whether the petitioner-accused No.5 has entered into an agreement dated 29.7.2017 and thereafter the accused persons have sold the property by the deed dated 12.9.2017 with an intention to cheat the complainant are all the matters which have to be considered and appreciated only at the time of trial. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is an advocate and he has only given the opinion and he has not cheated the complainant in any manner, that is also a matter which has to be gone into at the time of trial. Already accused Nos.1 and 2 have been released on bail. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Under such facts and circumstances, the petitioner is also entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner-accused No.5 is granted anticipatory bail. In the event of his arrest in Crime No.167/2018 of Yelahanka Police Station pending on the file of IV Additional CMM, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 406, 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. the petitioner herein is ordered to be released, subject to the following conditions:-
i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
ii) He shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from today.
iii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer/Court as and when required for the purpose of investigation/enquiry/trial.
iv) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses by threats, inducement or otherwise.
Consequently, I.A.No.1/2018 is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE *ck/-
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

Sri Madhu S vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
01 April, 2019
Judges
  • B A Patil