IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4660/2018 A/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4661/2018 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4662/2018 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4663/2018 BETWEEN:
SRI SHANMUGAM AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS S/O.R.K.NARAYANASWAMY MANAGING DIRECTOR SREE SHANMUGA MODERN RICE MILLS (P) LTD. KGF TO BANGARPET ROAD DESHIHALLI VILLAGE BANGARPET-563 114 M/S.SREE SHANMUGA FINANCE PROPRIETOR, NO.599 MAIN BAZZAR STREET BANGARPET TOWN-563 114 ... PETITIONER COMMON (BY SRI S.BALAKRISHNAN, ADVOATE) AND:
SRI B.M.CHANDRASHEKAR S/O.LATE Y.M.MUNI MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO.1431, 3RD CROSS VIJAYNAGAR BANGARPET-563 114 ... RESPONDENT IN CRL.P.Nos.4660 & 4661 of 2018 SRI CHIKKAMUNE GOWDA S/O.DODDA CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT: MUTHANUR VILLAGE GULLAHALLI POST BANGARPET TALUK-563 114 … RESPONDENT IN CRL.P.No.4662/2018 SRI B.NAGARAJA S/O.BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT: NO.3303, 6TH MAIN VIVEKANANDA NAGAR BANGARPET -563 114 … RESPONDENT IN CRL.P.No.4663/2018 THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 11.06.2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, BANGARPET IN CC.NOS.457/2018, 458/2018, 214/2018 AND 459/2018 RESPECTIVELY, DIRECTING THE ACCUSED TO EXECUTE BAIL BOND AND SURETY BOND AND PERMIT HIM TO APPEAR THROUGH HIS PLEADER WITHOUT FILING BAIL PETITION AND EXECUTING SURETY BOND.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
COMMON ORDER In these petitions, petitioner who is accused facing trial for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is before this Court for quashing of order dated 11.06.2018 passed in CC.Nos.457/2018, 458/2018, 214/2018 and 459/2018, whereunder learned trial Judge has rejected the application filed by the petitioner whereunder petitioner had sought for he should not be insisted to appear on all dates and execute surety bond/bail bond.
2. It is the contention of petitioner-accused that he is running two different establishments in which about 275 employees are working and he is suffering from diabetic mellitus and hypertension and due to uncontrolled sugar and he was advised to undergo dialysis as such his tight business schedule makes it impossible to appear before Court on all dates of hearing. Hence, he sought for allowing the application.
3. Learned trial Judge in all these cases has noticed that there are more than 30 cases pending against present petitioner and in some of the cases, matter came to be disposed of by way of compromise on 04.01.2018. It is also noticed that in remaining cases, accused-petitioner had obtained bail and has filed application for permanent exemption. Noticing that even after recording plea, accused had remained absent which in way is an intention to drag on the proceedings as such, taking into consideration the rigour of Section 88 of Cr.P.C., trial Judge has rejected the application in question and also other application filed under Section 205 of Cr.P.C. for granting permanent exemption and to answer plea through his Advocate as well as application filed under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act for the purpose of comparing disputed signature with admitted signature for getting expert opinion has been deferred, which order does not suffer from any infirmity either in law or on facts calling for interference. No grounds. Hence, petitions are dismissed.
In view of dismissal of petitions, IA.No.1/2018 for stay filed in all these petitions do not survive for consideration and they stand rejected.
SD/-
JUDGE LB