Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 931 (KAR)

Sundresh Gowda v. State of Karnataka

2022-07-19

H.P.SANDESH

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioners/accused on bail, in the event of their arrest in respect of Crime No. 40/2022 registered by Krishnaraja Police Station, Mysuru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 468, 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that these two petitioners have pledged the documents with the bank and availed the loan of Rs. 38 lakhs and they were repaying the loan amount and now, committed default in payment. Hence, on enquiry, found that the documents which have been pledged are forged documents and committed the offence of criminal breach of trust and fraud on the bank. Therefore, case has been registered against these two petitioners. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the property which is pledged with the bank is purchased in 2008 by these two petitioners and they are residing in the very same house and these petitioners have not indulged in committing any fraud or creation of any documents and in the complaint itself, an averment is made that the documents were given i.e., possession certificate in the year 1943 and also the endorsements on 07.02.1963, 25.04.1964 and also on 06.01.1966 and these two petitioners were not aware of any forgery or using of the said documents and the petitioners are residing in the very same property and they are ready to obey the conditions that may be imposed by the Court and will co- operate with the Investigating Officer for investigation with regard to the allegations made in the complaint. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State would submit that, in the complaint, specific allegation is made that an amount of Rs. 38 lakhs was obtained by these two petitioners and though sale deeds and other title deeds are given at the time of obtaining the loan, only on enquiry, the bank came to know about the fact that they are created documents. Hence, there is a prima facie case against the petitioners herein. 6. 38 lakhs was obtained by these two petitioners and though sale deeds and other title deeds are given at the time of obtaining the loan, only on enquiry, the bank came to know about the fact that they are created documents. Hence, there is a prima facie case against the petitioners herein. 6. Having heard the respective counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, it is the allegation that by pleading the created documents with the bank, loan has been availed and the matter requires to be investigated and probed. The loan was obtained in the year 2021 and case of the petitioners is that they are residing in the very same property from the year 2008, in which year the property was purchased and whether the documents are created or not has to be probed and the Investigating Officer has to probe the same. Hence, taking note of the allegations made in the complaint as well as the grounds urged in the bail petition, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioners directing the petitioners to co-operate with Investigating Officer for investigation in the matter with regard to the allegation of forgery and fraud, 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 petitioners shall be released on bail, in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 40/2022 registered by Krishnaraja Police Station, Mysuru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 468, 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The petitioners shall surrender themselves 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) each with two sureties each for the like- sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. (ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and they shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for. (ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and they shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for. (iv) The petitioners 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 petitioners shall mark their 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.