Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 273 (KAR)

Meena B. G v. State of Karnataka

2022-02-25

H.P.SANDESH

body2022
JUDGMENT H.P. Sandesh, J. - This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail, in the event of her arrest in respect of Crime No.236/2021 registered by Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police Station, Kengeri Gate Sub-Division, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that this petitioner entered into an agreement of sale with the complainant vide agreement dated 12.08.2020 and he did not come forward to execute the sale deed, instead, he sold the property in favour of somebody else in 2022. The main allegation against this petitioner is that he cheated the complainant. Based on the complaint, case has been registered. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a vendor and the petitioner also not disputes the fact that he entered into an agreement of sale with the complainant on 12.08.2020 and in terms of the sale agreement, earnest money deposit of Rs.10 lakhs and an amount of Rs.25 Lakhs was paid by way of cheque and total sale consideration is Rs.2.70 Crores. The counsel would submit that though the earnest money of Rs.35 lakhs was paid by way of cheques, both the cheques are not honoured and the copy of the cheque as well as CTS return memo is produced along with the petition. The counsel would also submit that in terms of the agreement, only three months was provided to complete the transaction, but the complainant did not come forward to complete the sale transaction and property was sold in January, 2022. Therefore, there is no question of invoking Section 420 of IPC. Hence, she may be enlarged on bail by invoking Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that in the complaint, it is specifically stated that an amount of Rs.25 lakhs paid by way of cash and an amount of Rs.10 lakhs through Bank of Maharashtra and also an amount of Rs.7 Lakhs was paid. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that in the complaint, it is specifically stated that an amount of Rs.25 lakhs paid by way of cash and an amount of Rs.10 lakhs through Bank of Maharashtra and also an amount of Rs.7 Lakhs was paid. It is also stated that the difference amounts are paid in favour of the different persons and hence, in all, total amount of Rs.50 lakhs having been received as sale consideration while executing the sale agreement, the petitioner has committed breach. 6. Having heard the respective counsel and also considering the material on record, the petitioner has relied upon the sale agreement dated 12.08.2020 and also in terms of the sale agreement, three months time was provided to complete the sale transaction from the date of the agreement and the time is the essence of the contract. The learned counsel for the petitioner also prima facie placed the document of dishonour of cheque given in favour of the complainant in terms of the agreement and the complainant also submits that some payment was made by way of cash as well as cheque. When such being the factual aspects of the case, it is a matter of civil dispute and hence, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner, subject to imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:- ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner- accused No.1 shall be released on bail, in the event of her arrest in connection with Crime No.236/2021 registered by Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police Station, Kengeri Gate Sub-Division, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall surrender herself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. (ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and she shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for. (ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and she shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for. (iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer without prior permission till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months, whichever is earlier. (v) The petitioner shall mark her attendance once in a month i.e., on 30th of every month between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a period of three months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.