Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1548 (KAR)

Anand Kumar v. State of Karnataka

2022-12-02

SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.125/2022 of Kudithini Police Station for the offences punishable under Ss. 405, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC', for brevity). 2. The case of the prosecution is that, Smt. Thippamma and Smt. Saradaramma both are residents of Kudithini town have filed joint complaint stating that Jindal Company has decided to purchase the lands of complainants bearing Sy.Nos.1247 and 1281 and others lands also in Kudithini town. As there was some hurdle in the procedure, due to indulgence of District Commissioner and local MLA resolved the same and after taking consent from government, it was fixed 23 lakhs per acre. It is further stated that the complainants are illiterate and have no knowledge about the procedures, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 have also sold their lands to Jindal Company and they along with petitioner No.3 on the guise of helping the complainants, opened the joint account in the name of the complainants in Karnataka Gamina Bank, Kudithini on 5/10/2018 and collected the pass books and cheques with the signatures. The Jindal Company has deposited Rs.92,33,813.00 to the joint account of complainants in installments. It is further stated that the accused have deposited only Rs.60,33,813.00 in the joint account of the complainants and remaining Rs.32.00 lakhs have been utilized by themselves. The complainants came to know after getting the bank statements through others. The complainants made enquiry with the accused persons, they told that the amount was spent for the transactions. When the complainant quarreled with the accused, petitioner No.3-Mahesh told the complainants that he had taken Rs.22.00 lakhs and that he has deposited Rs.10.00 lakhs to the complainants account, but he has utilized Rs.12.00 lakhs for his own purpose. Likewise, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 along with petitioner No.3 have taken Rs.10.00 lakhs for their personal use. It is further stated that the accused persons have collected Rs.50,000.00 and 1,00,000/- on the pretext that they would get employment and a house for the land loosers from the Jindal Company and they have cheated the complainants. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.125/2022 of Kudithini Police Station for the offences punishable under Ss. It is further stated that the accused persons have collected Rs.50,000.00 and 1,00,000/- on the pretext that they would get employment and a house for the land loosers from the Jindal Company and they have cheated the complainants. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.125/2022 of Kudithini Police Station for the offences punishable under Ss. 405, 406 and 420 of IPC against the petitioners. The petitioners apprehending their arrest have filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.797/2022 seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected by learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ballari by order dtd. 27/10/2022. Therefore, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent- State. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that there is a delay in filing the complaint. The accused persons have not cheated the complainants who have alleged that accused No.3 who is working as employee in KPTCL has received Rs.22.00 lakhs from the joint account of the complainants to his account on 30/12/2020 and he has returned Rs.10.00 lakhs each on 21/6/2021 and 24/6/2021 to the joint account of the complainants. It is his further submission that he has paid remaining amount of Rs.2.00 lakhs by cash to the son of complainant (Thippamma). It is his further submission that therefore the allegation against petitioner No.3/accused No.3 is false. The receipt of amount of Rs.2.00 lakhs paid by cash and Rs.20.00 lakhs paid through account has been stated in the complaint filed by C. Basavaraj S/o. Thippamma in his complaint dtd. 19/9/2022 filed before Cyber Police Station, Ballari. It is his further submission that there is no allegation against petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2. It is his further submission that the said joint account of the complainants has been opened on 5/10/2018 which is four years prior to the filing of the present complaint. It is his further submission that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the Police in investigation. The offences alleged against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The case of the prosecution is based on documents. Further learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of this Court rendered in Criminal Petition No.102183/2022, stating that in similar circumstances this Court has granted anticipatory bail to the accused persons. The offences alleged against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The case of the prosecution is based on documents. Further learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of this Court rendered in Criminal Petition No.102183/2022, stating that in similar circumstances this Court has granted anticipatory bail to the accused persons. With this, he prayed to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that the investigation is in progress. So far as the investigation is done it revealed that the petitioner No.1/accused No.1 has affixed his signature on the back of self cheque drawn from the joint account of the complainants for a sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs on 2/1/2021 and he has misappropriated the said cash of Rs.10.00 lakhs drawn from the bank and credited a sum of Rs.8.00 lakhs to his account under the same bank on the same date i.e. on 2/1/2021. It is his further submission that a sum of Rs.22.00 lakhs has been transferred to the account of accused No.3 from the joint account of the complainants and even though he has credited Rs.10.00 lakhs each on two different dates but, there is no material to show that he has paid remaining amount of Rs.2.00 lakhs by cash. It is his further submission that the petitioners are required for custodial interrogation. One of the offence alleged against the petitioners under Sec. 420 of IPC is provided with punishment of imprisonment for 7 years. If the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, they will hamper the investigation and tamper the prosecution witnesses. With this, he prayed to reject the petition. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the averments of the complaint, other documents produced by the counsel for the petitioners and investigation papers facilitated by learned High Court Government Pleader. 7. The lands of the complainants have been purchased by Jindal Company and huge amount has been credited to the joint account of the complainants. It is alleged in the complaint that accused No.3 got transfer of Rs.22.00 lakhs from the joint account of the complainants to his account and he has only repaid Rs.10.00 lakhs and not paid the balance of Rs.12.00 lakhs. It is alleged in the complaint that accused No.3 got transfer of Rs.22.00 lakhs from the joint account of the complainants to his account and he has only repaid Rs.10.00 lakhs and not paid the balance of Rs.12.00 lakhs. It is further alleged in the complaint that accused Nos.1 and 2 have misappropriated Rs.10.00 lakhs drawn from the joint account of the complainants by self cheque. In the complaint it is further alleged that totally the petitioners have cheated the complainants a sum of Rs.22.00 lakhs. Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced photo copy of the statement of bank account of the petitioner No.3/accused No.3 wherein, there is entry dtd. 30/12/2020 that a sum of Rs.22.00 lakhs has been credited to his account from the joint account of the complainants. There is also an entry dtd. 21/6/2021 wherein, petitioner No.3/accused no.3 has transferred a sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs from his account to the joint account of the complainants. There is another entry dtd. 24/6/2021 wherein, another sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs has been transferred from the account of the petitioner No.3/accused No.3 to the joint account of complainants. Therefore, out of the sum of Rs.22.00 lakhs, petitioner No.3/accused No.3 has transferred Rs.20.00 lakhs on two different dates noted above. It is further stated that accused No.3 has paid remaining amount of Rs.2.00 lakhs by cash to the son of the complainant (Thippamma). The son of the complainant (Thippamma) has filed the complaint dtd. 19/9/2022 wherein, there is a mention regarding transfer of Rs.10.00 lakhs each on two different dates to the joint account of the complainants from the account of petitioner No.3/accused No.3. There is also mention that this petitioner No.3/accused No.3 has paid cash of Rs.2.00 lakhs. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 are son and father. There is allegation in the complaint that petitioners have cheated the complainants for a sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs each. The investigation papers contain a self cheque drawn from the joint account of the complainants dtd. 2/1/2021 for a sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs and it has been encashed by receiving cash. There is signature of petitioner No.1/accused No.1 on the back of the said cheque along with signature and LTM of the complainants. There is also mention of a number i.e. 33089, which is account number of the petitioner No.1/accused No.1 maintained with Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank, Ballari. There is signature of petitioner No.1/accused No.1 on the back of the said cheque along with signature and LTM of the complainants. There is also mention of a number i.e. 33089, which is account number of the petitioner No.1/accused No.1 maintained with Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank, Ballari. The Investigating Officer has collected the bank statement of the said account which is in the name of petitioner No.1/accused No.1. In that account there is entry of credit of Rs.8.00 lakhs by cash on 2/1/2022. Therefore, the allegations in the complaint that petitioner No.1/accused No.1 cheated them for Rs.10.00 lakhs appears to be true from the said documents. There are no documents produced by learned counsel for the petitioners to show that petitioner No.1/accused No.1 has repaid the amount of Rs.8.00 lakhs credited from his account on 2/1/2021 to the joint account of the complainants. The decision relied on by learned counsel for the petitioners is not applicable to the case in hand, as the facts are different. In the said case there is a transaction regarding sale of the property. Therefore, there is prima facie case made out against petitioner No.1/accused No.1 and he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Petitioner No.2/accused No.2 who is the father of petitioner No.1, there are no any specific allegations against him apart from joint allegations against petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2. Therefore, in view of the same, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are entitled for grant of anticipatory bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition filed under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. insofar as petitioner No.1/accused No.1 is concerned is dismissed. The petition filed under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. insofar as petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 are concerned is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.125/2022 of Kudithini Police Station, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000.00 (Rupees One Lakh Only) each with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. ii. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from this day and execute bail bond and furnish surety. ii. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from this day and execute bail bond and furnish surety. iii. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall remain present before the Police Station concerned on every Sunday between 10:00 a.m. and 06:00 p.m. and mark their presence for a period of two months or till filing of the final report, whichever is earlier. iv. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall co-operate in the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required. v. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer. vi. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police. The Investigating Officer shall not be influenced by the observations made by this Court in passing this order.