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

Sri Vinod Prataparai Shah vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|02 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3572/2019 BETWEEN:
SRI.VINOD PRATAPARAI SHAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, S/O PRATAPRAI CHANGALAL SHAH, R/AT H.NO.204, VEER SAVARKAR MARG, PARK APARTMENT, SHIVAJI PARK, DADAR (WEST), MUMBAI – 400 028.
(BY SRI.VISHWAJITH SHETTY S., ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA, PANAMBUR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU – 560 001.
(BY SRI. HONNAPPA, 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 CR.NO.190/2018 OF PANAMBUR POLICE STATION, MANGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406 AND 420 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. Perused the records.
2. On perusal of the FIR it appears that it is a business transaction between the petitioner and the complainant. The complaint was referred to the police for investigation under S.156(3) of Cr.P.C. and later police have registered a case in Crime No.190/2018 for the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC. The complainant has stated that at the advice and insistence of the petitioner, he has given 46,979 Dollars to the account of a well-known person of the accused for the purpose of supplying timber. Thereafter in spite of repeated requests, timber has not been supplied nor amount has been returned. Therefore, the complaint came to be lodged.
3. The above said facts and circumstances are more like civil in nature. During the course of investigation and trial, the real intention of the parties will have to be established in order with prove the offences under S.420 of IPC.
4. In the wake of above said facts and circumstances, in my opinion, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail with stringent conditions. Hence, the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.190/2018 of Panambur Police Station, subject to the following conditions:-
i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and he shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/Jurisdictional Court.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation, and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Mangaluru / D.K. District without prior permission of the Court, till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months whichever is earlier.
v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in fifteen days on any Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the final report is filed to the Court.
sac* Sd/-
JUDGE
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 Vinod Prataparai Shah vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
02 August, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra