Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 2174 (KAR)

Sunil Singh v. State Of Karnataka By

2020-11-03

B.A.PATIL

body2020
JUDGMENT B.A.Patil, J. - The present petition has been filed by the petitionersaccused Nos.1 and 3 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to release them on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.53/2020 of Hebbal Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code. 2. I have heard the learned counsel Kum.Sruti Chaganti for the petitioners-accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader Sri.Mahesh Shetty for the respondent-State. 3. The gist of the complaint is that the complainant is a Diploma Holder and was in search of a job. He received a pamphlet referring to availability of jobs and he called on the telephone number indicated in the pamphlet and complainant went to the office along with his friends and on believing the words they went for four days training and there they informed that, on 5th day there will be an interview and by believing the words and after completing the training, on the 3rd day they informed that they have to deposit an amount of Rs.38,080/- before they want to attend the interview and they were astonished by hearing the same. As they were in search of a job, each one of them paid an amount of Rs.38,080/- to ICONIVO TYRANTS MARKET PRIVATE LIMITED and no receipt has been issued and when they went for seeking a job in the Company they instructed each one of them to bring four persons and ask them to join the Company, only thereafter they will return the money to the complainant and others, otherwise they will not paid any salary and they will not get the job, thereby they have cheated the complainant and his friends. On the basis of the complaint a case has been registered. 4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 3 that the alleged incident has taken place on 15.9.2020 onwards, but the complaint has been got registered belatedly after a long gap. It is her further submission that the petitioners-accused have not committed any offence and absolutely there is no incriminating material as against the petitioners-accused. The ingredients of the provisions of Sections 406 and 420 of IPC are also not attracted. It is her further submission that no date of events are forthcoming in the complaint. It is her further submission that the petitioners-accused have not committed any offence and absolutely there is no incriminating material as against the petitioners-accused. The ingredients of the provisions of Sections 406 and 420 of IPC are also not attracted. It is her further submission that no date of events are forthcoming in the complaint. It is her further submission that for having purchased the garments from the Company of the petitioners-accused, the invoices have been issued only with an intention to harass and with political motivation the present complaint has been filed. It is her further submission that there was some transactions between the petitioner No.1-Company and the complainant. In that light, a false complaint has been registered. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. They are ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to offer the sureties. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioners-accused on bail. 5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioners-accused and its Company has cheated more than 5000 people and the said modus aparandi is used against all of them. It is his further submission that two more cases have also been registered as against the petitioners-accused at Hassan and Shivamogga. It is his further submission that the accused persons have conspired and have committed the alleged offence. It is his further submission that the petitioner-accused No.1 is a resident of Kashmir and if he is released on bail he may abscond and may not be available for trial. On these grounds he prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records. 7. On close reading of the contents of the complaint it indicates that on the basis of the pamphlets they approached the petitioners-accused Company and they have undertaken to give training and thereafter they have extracted the money to the extent of Rs.38,080/- and they did not refund the said amount when it has been asked to return. That is the matter which has to be considered and appreciated during the course of trial. That is the matter which has to be considered and appreciated during the course of trial. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitionersaccused that some transactions were there between the complainant and the petitioners - Company and some garments have been sold to the complainant and invoices have been issued in this behalf. That is also the matter which has to be taken into consideration during the course of trial. When the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and some suspicious circumstances are also existing with regard to filing of the complaint and the transactions, under such circumstances, if by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 3 are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice. 8. In that light, this petition is allowed. The petitioners-accused No.1 and 3 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.53/2020 of Hebbal Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code, subject to the following conditions: i. Each of the petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two local sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. ii. They shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 20 days from today, failing which this order automatically stands cancelled. iii. They shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly. iv. They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and co-operate for investigation. v. They shall mark their attendance before the Investigating Officer once in 15 days in between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till the charge sheet is filed. vi. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.