IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7105/2017 BETWEEN:
SMT.SUGANDHA W/O WILLIAMS AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS OCC: HOUSEWIFE R/A NO.2105, OLD K.R.NAGARA ROAD HUNSUR TOWN MYSORE DISTRICT – 571105 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARA K.A., ADVOCATE) AND:
1 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE POLICE OF HUNSUR TOWN POLICE STATION HUNSUR MYSORE DISTRICT 571105 REPT. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001 2 G.SELVAKUMAR S/O LATE B.G.RATHNAM AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/A BETHAL FARM HOUSE RAMAPATTANA, HUNSUR TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT – 571105 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 Cr.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.08.2017 PASSED BY THE VIII ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU SITTING AT HUNSUR IN CRL.RP NO.240/2017 AND THE ORDER DATED 12.06.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, HUNSUR IN CR.NO.107/2017 OF HUNSUR TOWN P.S. AND RESTORE THE ORDER DATED 11.04.2017 PASSED IN CR.NO.107/2017 OF HUNSUR TOWN POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 418, 406, 379 IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard Sri Chandrashekara, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner and Sri Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent-1 – State. Perused the records.
2. Hunsur Town Police Station, Mysore District have registered a case in Crime No.107/2017 against petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 408, 418, 379 IPC on the basis of complaint lodged by second respondent alleging that while he was going abroad, complainant had handed over a Godrej Gold Jewellary box containing gold jewellary ornaments to accused who is his relative for being kept in safe custody by reposing confidence and trust in her and on returning back, he had approached and demanded the petitioner – accused to return the gold articles and she refused to return the same and as such, complaint came to be lodged. During the course of investigation, jurisdictional police have found certain materials with regard to sale of one gold diamond necklace to Tanishq Jewellary shop for exchange of gold coins by the petitioner. Petitioner came to be enlarged on bail by the jurisdictional Magistrate by order dated 11.04.2017. One of the conditions imposed by the jurisdictional Court was to the effect:
“Accused shall appear before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation/interrogation in respect of the facts narrated in the requisition filed by the Investigating Officer as and when directed to do so.”
3. However, on account of petitioner not appearing before jurisdictional Investigating Officer despite notices being issued, an application came to be moved by the prosecution for cancellation of bail granted to petitioner. The jurisdictional Court, by order dated 12.06.2017 cancelled the bail granted to petitioner on 11.04.2017 by dismissing the application filed by the accused whereunder, she had sought for modification of the earlier bail order. Said order on being challenged before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru resulted in its dismissal on 16.08.2017.
4. As could be seen from the requisition filed by the prosecution for cancellation of bail, it would disclose that on several occasions i.e., on 15.04.2017, 19.04.2017 & 24.04.2017 petitioner was called upon to appear before Investigating Officer to assist him in carrying out the investigation and despite service of notice, on one pretext or the other, petitioner has failed to appear and only on 24.04.2017 petitioner appeared along with her advocate and on account of Investigating Officer was required to proceed on emergency case relating to Crime No.122/2016, interrogation could not take place on said date and as such, fresh notice was issued. However, subsequently also petitioner never appeared on the pretext that she has challenged the registration of FIR in Crl.P.No.3616/2017 which undisputedly came to be dismissed on 30.07.2017.
5. At this juncture, Sri Chandrashekara, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner submits that petitioner is ready to appear before the Investigating Officer unconditionally on any date as may be fixed by this Court. His submission and undertaking is placed on record. It is also made clear that petitioner – accused shall file an affidavit of undertaking before the jurisdictional Court to that effect within one week from today.
6. In the light of the aforestated facts and the undertaking given by learned Advocate appearing for petitioner – accused, this Court is of the considered view that order dated 12.06.2017 cancelling the bail granted to the petitioner as also the order dated 16.08.2017 passed affirming said order dated 12.06.2017 deserves to be set aside, conditionally.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (1) Criminal petition is hereby allowed.
(2) Order dated 12.06.2017 passed by Principal Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Hunsur in Crime No.107/2017 as also order dated 16.08.2017 passed by VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mysuru sitting at Hunsur in Crl.R.P.No.240/2017 are hereby set aside.
(3) Petitioner is hereby directed to appear before the Investigating Officer in Crime No.107/2017 on 16.10.2017 at 11.00 a.m.
without fail as undertaken by learned Advocate appearing for her.
(4) It is made clear that petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of order of bail which came to be passed on 11.04.2017 by the jurisdictional Court.
(5) It is also made clear that in the event of affidavit of undertaking not being filed before the jurisdictional Court within one week from today, order of cancellation of bail shall stand revived.
SD/- JUDGE *sp