IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1702 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
VINOD M. SHERLEKAR, S/O. LATE M.D. SHERLEKAR, AGED 55 YEARS, R/AT ‘SHILPA’, BEJAI CHURCH CROSS ROAD, MANGALORE-575 004. ... PETITIONER [BY SRI. S.RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE] AND:
STATE BY PANAMBUR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT [BY SRI.NASRULLA KHAN, HCGP] * * * 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.172/2018 OF PANAMBUR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406 AND 409 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.172/2018 of Panambur Police Station, Mangaluru registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 409 of IPC. The complaint is lodged by the Enforcement Officer, Regional Provident Fund Office, Highland, Mangaluru.
2. It is stated that the petitioner was the Managing Partner of the Partnership Firm by name M/s. Century Automobiles which was mainly carrying on business in dealership with the General Motors with the sale of cars by name Chevrolet cars. The said firm has been now closed. It is the allegation against the accused persons that they collected the provident fund amount to the tune of Rs.7,78,548/- between June 2015 to June 2018 and also collected a sum of Rs.54,200/- from the employees in connection with another firm by name M/s.Fabrotech Engineering Co., Bankarpady from September 2017 to March 2018 and they totally collected a sum of Rs.8,32,748/-. However, without depositing the sum, have committed the offence under Sections 406 and 409 of IPC.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly, both the firms have been closed. He submits that there is no question of filing the returns and contributing to the provident fund and that the ingredients of the offence are not made out. Accordingly, seeks to allow the petition.
Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent/State contended that the case is still under investigation and the petitioners are absconding. In the event of grant of anticipatory bail, the petitioners may tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Accordingly, seeks to dismiss the petition.
4. According to the petitioner, they have already closed the firm and the present case has been registered against them only with an intention to pressurize them. The offence alleged against the petitioner are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits, I am of the view that the petitioner may be released on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.172/2018 of Panambur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 409 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the case within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees One Lakh Only] with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(ii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for, for the purpose of investigation.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witness/es in any manner either directly or indirectly.
Sd/- JUDGE Ksm*