IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2709 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
WAMAN MATHI RAM KALE S/O.LATE MOTHIRAM KALE AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT.NO.1743, 80 FEET ROAD 2ND MAIN ROAD HEBBAL 2ND STAGE MYSURU.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI.N.KUMAR, ADV.,) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HEABBAL POLICE STATION MYSURU NOW REPTD. BY S.P.P. HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI.S.RACHAIAH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.2.2019 IN CRL.R.P.NO.13/2019 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/S.457 OF CR.P.C.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. N. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. S. Rachaiah, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’ for short), the petitioner inter-alia has assailed the validity of the order dated 08.01.2019 passed by the trial Court by which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 457 of the Code for release of the seized amount from the petitioner, was allowed subject to furnishing of bank guarantee.
The petitioner has also assailed the validity of the order dated 16.02.2019 by which the aforesaid order has been affirmed in revision petition by the revisional court.
4. Facts giving rise to filing of this petition briefly stated are that the respondent had registered a case against the petitioner vide Crime No.25/2018 for the offence under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act. During the course of investigation, the police had seized a sum of Rs.40,45,350/- from the petitioner. Petitioner thereafter filed an application under Section 457 of the Code to release the aforesaid amount. The trial Court by order dated 14.11.2018 rejected the aforesaid application. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed a revision petition before the revisional court. By order dated 07.12.2018, the matter was remitted to the trial Court to consider the application afresh.
5. The trial Court by order dated 08.01.2019 directed the petitioner to furnish the bank guarantee for release of the amount. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed one more revision petition seeking to relax the condition and accept the house property as security instead of bank guarantee. The aforesaid application has been rejected by the impugned order dated 16.02.2019.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to furnish the original documents in respect of his residential house which is of a value of more than Rs.80,00,000/-, before the trial Court.
7. The aforesaid prayer has not been fairly opposed by the learned High Court Government Pleader.
8. In view of the aforesaid statement and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the original documents in respect of his residential property which is more than Rs.80,00,000/- in value, I am inclined to quash the orders dated 08.01.219 and 16.02.2019 insofar as it pertains to imposition of condition of furnishing bank guarantee for release of the amount in question. Accordingly, it is directed that in case the petitioner deposits the original title deeds in respect of his residential property before the trial Court and in addition, furnishes an indemnity bond for a sum of Rs.40,45,350/- with one surety for the likesum, the trial Court shall release the amount seized from the petitioner in accordance with law.
9. With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- Judge VP