IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION No. 1590/2019 BETWEEN:
UDAYA PRATAP, S/O KALAVATHI UDAYAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.27, SUBBANNA LAYOUT, NEAR SAINT PHILOMENA’S SCHOOL, DODDABOMMASANDRA, VIDYARANYAPURA, BENGALURU – 560 097.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. VEERANNA G TIGADI, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY YESHWANTHAPURA P.S. REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU – 560 001.
(BY SRI. K P YOGANNA, HCGP) ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 438 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.54/2019 OF YESHWANTHAPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.409 AND 420 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner – accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail. The respondent –Yeshwanthapur Police registered a case against the petitioner under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC alleging that he has misappropriated a sum to the tune of Rs.12,37,415/-. In stead of depositing the same to the Government or treasury, he has deposited to his own bank account and the same is said to be withdrawn by him.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is working in BESCOM. He is having children to look after and permanent resident of Bengaluru, in case of granting bail, he will be abide by any of the conditions which this Court may impose and hence he prays for allowing this petition.
3. On the other hand, learned HCGP objects for granting anticipatory bail on the ground that the amount actually misappropriated by the petitioner is than Rs.23 lakhs and odd. On verification of the bank account of the petitioner, no balance amount available in his account. Therefore, petitioner is required for custodial interrogation for recovery of the misappropriated amount. In the event of granting anticipatory bail, it is impossible for the Investigating Officer to recover the money from the petitioner. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material on record.
5. The alleged offences are though not exclusively punishable for death or imprisonment for life. But the petitioner being the an employee of BESCOM, misappropriated the amount more than Rs.23 lakhs, and nothing has been recovered till date. Therefore, he is required for custodial interrogation by the I.O.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case petitioner has not prima facie made out any good grounds for grant of anticipatory bail. Petition stands rejected.
The petitioner is ordered to be surrendered before trial court or before Investigating officer and to move for regular bail thereafter.
SD/- JUDGE Bsv