IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7976/2019 BETWEEN:
Gururaj, Aged about 22 years, S/o Subbegowda R/at Arjunahalli, K.R.Nagar Taluk, Mysuru District – 571 602. (By Sri.P.Nataraju, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By Hunsur Town Police Station, Mysuru District.
Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001.
(By Sri.Rohith B.J., 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.158/2019 of Hunsur Town Police Station, Mysuru District For the offence P/U/S 406, 408, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 read with Section 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.5 in Crime No.158/2019 of Hunusur Town Police Station, Mysuru, for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 408, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has been serving as employee in IDFC First Bharat Limited, a financial Company situated at 1st Stage, Near Geetha School, Siddarth Nagar, Mysuru. The said institution has been doing financial business like lending loans to the customers. In the said Company, accused No.1-Babu was working as Branch Manager and accused No.2-Raghu was working as Additional Cashier and accused Nos.3 to 5 were working as GROs. It is alleged that they created some fake documents pertaining to a fake customer and got released loan in the name of a fictitious person and utilized the said loan for themselves and repaying the same. After coming to know about the same, a complaint has been lodged. An amount of Rs.9,09,643/- was found to be unpaid. There are serious allegations with regard to creation of fake documents in the name of fictitious person for grant of loan. It has to be ascertained during the course of investigation that which are the documents are fake, whether they contain any signature of the petitioner or custodial interrogation is necessary. Therefore, I am of the opinion that petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.
With these observations, petition stands dismissed.
However, it is made clear that after the arrest, the petitioner-accused No.5 is at liberty to file necessary application for grant of regular bail. In that eventuality, the trial Court has to consider the said application as expeditiously as possible without unnecessary delay.
Sd/- JUDGE SB