Karnataka High Court
Srinivasa Rao Kaki vs State Of Karnataka on 19 December, 2024
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRL.P.No. 11267/2024
C/W
CRL.P.Nos. 11395/2024, 11420/2024, 11786/2024
IN CRL. P No.11267/2024:
BETWEEN:
CHANDRA MOHAN M
S/O GOPAL N
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT SHOBHA DREAM GARDEN
APARTMENT, FLAT NO.6056
WING - 6B, 5TH FLOOR
KANNUR ROAD, BELLAHALLI
BENGALURU - 562 149.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SUDHANVA D.S, ADV.)
AND:
Digitally
signed by
NANDINI MS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Location: High THE CID/HIGH GROUNDS POLICE
Court of
Karnataka BY SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI B.N. JAGADEESH, SPL. P.P)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483
BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.118/2024 REGISTERED BY HIGH GROUNDS POLICE FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471 R/W
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
149 OF IPC AND SEC.13(1)(a)R/W 13(2) OF P.C ACT PENDING
BEFORE THE XXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AND SPL.JUDGE (P.C ACT) AT BENGALURU.
IN CRL. P No.11395/2024:
BETWEEN:
MR. J.G. PADMANABHA
S/O LATE GOPAL KRISHNA J
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT NO.3, 8TH CROSS
GANESHNAGAR LAYOUT
KODIGEHALLI, HEBBAL
BENGALURU - 560 097.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI HANUMANTHARAYA C.H, ADV., A/W
MS. ABHINAYA, ADV.,)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH GROUNDS POLICE STATION
(NOW INVESTIGATED BY SIT
CID, BENGALURU) REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI JAGADEESHA B.N, ADV.)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483
BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.118/2024 (C.C.NO. /24) REGISTERED WITH THE HIGH
GROUNDS POLICE STATION, BENGALURU ON 28.05.2024 FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 409, 420, 465, 468, 471 AND 120B OF
IPC, PENDING BEFORE THE 2
RD ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGLAURU
CITY (NAME OF COURT AS FOUND IN ANNEXURE-H) AT
BENGALURU.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
IN CRL. P No.11420/2024:
BETWEEN:
SRINIVASA RAO KAKI
S/O SUBRAMANYAM KAKI
AGED 32 YEARS
RESIDENT OF B-1604
VAISHNAVI NAKASHTRA APARTMENTS
NEAR YESHWANTHPUR RAILWAY
STATION, YESHWANTPURA, BANGALORE.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI NARASIMHA CHARULU, ADV., FOR
SRI BUBBERJUNG TRISULI VENKATESH, ADV.)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY S H O, HIGH GROUND POLICE
STATION, NOW INVESTIGATING BY
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM (S.I.T)
CRIME INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT (C.I.D)
(FINANCIAL INVESTIGATION UNIT (F.I.U)
SQUAD BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR &
HIGH COURT, BENGALURU - 01.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI JAGADEESHA B.N, ADV.)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483
BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.118/2024, FOR OFFENCE P/U/S 120B, 406, 420, 465,
468 AND 471 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF XXIII
ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE (P.C.
ACT) BENGALURU.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
IN CRL. P No.11786/2024:
BETWEEN:
SRI JAGADISH G.K
S/O KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT NWC 201/A
GANESHA COLONY
BHADRAVATHI - 577 301.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI VISWANATHA SETTY V, ADV.)
AND:
STATE BY HIGH GROUNDS P.S
CID, REP. BY SR. STATE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, AMBEDKAR VEEDI
VIDHANA SOUDA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI JAGADEESHA B.N, ADV,)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS)
PRAYING TO GRANT BAIL TO THE PETITIONER HEREIN AND BE
PLEASED TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE /
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.118/2024
(C.C.NO.25626/2024) REGISTERED BY THE HIGH GROUNDS
P.S./CID FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S
149,409,420,467,468,471 OF IPC AGAINST THE PETITIONER.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Accused Nos.2, 5, 7 and 8 in Crime No.118/2024
registered by High Grounds Police Station, Benglauru City, for
the offences punished under Sections 120B, 406, 409, 420,
465, 468, 471 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988, pending before the Court of XXIII
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge
(Prevention of Corruption Act), Bengaluru, are before this Court
in these four petitions filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
seeking regular bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. FIR in Crime No.118/2024 was registered by High
Grounds Police Station, Bengaluru City, initially for the offences
punishable under Sections 149, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of
IPC against Manimekhalai A and others on the basis of the first
information dated 28.05.2024 received from A. Rajashekar,
General Manager of Karnataka Maharshi Valmiki Schedule
Tribes Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
Corporation’ for short). During the course of investigation of the
case, accused No.2 was arrested on 15.07.2024, accused No.5
was arrested on 31.05.2024, accused No.7 was arrested on
12.06.2024 and accused No.8 was arrested on 13.06.2024.
Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has
now been filed against 12 persons for the aforesaid offences.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
Petitioners herein are arraigned as accused Nos.2, 5, 7 and 8 in
the charge sheet. Bail application filed by the accused Nos.2, 7
and 8 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crime
No.118/2024 was rejected on 04.10.2024 and bail application
filed by accused No.5 in Crl.Misc.No.8837/2024 was dismissed
on 09.10.2024. Therefore, they are before this Court.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of accused No.2
submits that accused No.1 is the friend of accused No.2, who is
a businessman and stock broker. Accused No.1 had come to
the house of accused No.2 as a guest and he has used the
computer of accused No.2 without the knowledge of accused
No.2 and has created fraudulent documents based on which
bank accounts were opened in a financial institution known as
First Finance Credit Co-operative Society Limited at Hyderabad.
He submits that accused No.2 has purchased a car by
borrowing money from accused No.1 much prior to the alleged
fraud. Accused No.2 has voluntarily surrendered before the
police on 15.07.2024. He has cooperated with the police for the
purpose of investigation and the investigation is now completed
and therefore, custody of accused No.2 is no more required.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of accused No.5
submits that accused No.5 was the Managing Director of the
Corporation and the fixed deposits of the Corporation were
transferred to Union Bank of India, M. G. Road Branch,
Benglauru, without his consent and knowledge and after
coming to know about that, it was accused No.5, who had
initially made a complaint to the Department as well as to the
Bank and sought redeposit of the fixed deposit. He submits that
only after accused No.5 made a complaint, the officials of Union
Bank of India also had made a complaint belatedly on
06.06.2024. The allegation against accused No.5 and accused
No.6 are similar. Accused No.6, who was the Accounts Head of
the Corporation has been already enlarged on bail. Accused
No.5 has not admitted his guilt at any point of time during the
course of interrogation. However, in his remand application, it
is wrongly mentioned that he has admitted to the crime. He has
referred to the statement of CWs 44, 54, 62 and 63 and
submits that from the aforesaid statement, it is very clear that
fixed deposits of the Corporation were transferred to Union
Bank of India, M. G. Road Branch, Bengaluru, without the
knowledge of accused No.5 and the transfer of fixed deposits
-8-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
was done as per the instructions of the concerned Minister. He
also submits that accused No.5 had appeared before the
Investigation Officer for the purpose of enquiry and without
recording any reasons, he was thereafter arrested and even
grounds of arrest was not served on him.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.7
and 8 submit that the said accused are businessman and
accused Nos.3, 9 and 11 against whom similar allegations are
found in the charge sheet have already been enlarged on bail
by the jurisdictional Sessions Court. Accused Nos.7 and 8 do
not have any criminal antecedents. Accordingly, they pray to
allow the petition.
7. Per contra, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor has
seriously opposed the petition. He submits that accused Nos.2
and 5 are persons with criminal antecedents. Accused Nos.1
and 2 is involved in Crime No.105/2022 registered by Raipur
Police Station, Chattisgarh for similar offences and in the said
case, charge sheet is filed and the case is now pending in CC
No.12300/2022 before the jurisdictional Court. The modus
operandi of the accused in the said case is similar to the
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
present case. Accused No.2 also has destroyed evidence and
has not cooperated with the police for the purpose of
investigation. Accused Nos.1 and 2 have manipulated the
documents of 18 companies which were submitted by the said
companies to the Labour Department and had opened fictitious
bank accounts at First Finance Credit Co-operative Society
Limited at Hyderabad and the money was transferred to the
said accounts and withdrawn clandestinely. Six victims out of
the aforesaid 18, have filed separate six criminal cases against
accused Nos.1 and 2. They have not been granted bail in the
said cases. Accused No.5 is involved in similar case while he
was serving as District Manager in Ambedkar Development
Corporation, Bengaluru Urban District and FIR was registered in
Crime No.191/2019 by Magadi Road Police Station, Bengaluru
for similar offences. He has been charge sheeted in the said
case and the case is now pending trial. Huge amount has been
recovered from the custody of accused No.5 and also from the
friend’s house of the children of accused No.5. Accused Nos.7
and 8 have arranged for opening bank accounts in Union Bank
of India, M. G. Road Branch, Bengaluru, and facilitated transfer
of the fixed deposit amount and they have received huge
– 10 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
commission for the same. He submits that in the event,
petitioners are enlarged on bail, they are likely to tamper with
the prosecution witnesses and also involve in similar offences.
In support of his arguments, he has placed reliance on the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manik
Madhukar Sarve and Others vs. Vitthal Damuji Meher and
Others – 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2271. Accordingly, he prays
to dismiss the petitions.
8. The allegation against accused No.2 in the charge sheet is
that he being a close friend of accused No.1 had conspired to
transfer the fixed deposits of the Corporation to some other
Bank with an intention to receive kickbacks and in this regard,
they had met his friends accused Nos.11 and 12 and thereafter,
they all had visited the office of the Corporation and after
meeting accused Nos.5 and 6 had discussed with them about
the transfer of fixed deposits of the Corporation to some other
Bank. Accused Nos.1 and 2 by using computer of accused No.2
had opened 18 fictitious accounts in First Finance Co-operative
Society Limited by using documents which were submitted by
the owners of the Companies before the Labour Department
– 11 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
and had received huge amount in their fictitious accounts from
Union Bank of India, M. G. Road Branch, Bengaluru after the
fixed deposits of the Corporation was transferred to the said
Bank. Accused Nos.1 and 2 are persons with criminal
antecedents. Learned Addl. State Public Prosecutor has placed
material before this Court which prima facie shows that accused
Nos.1 and 2 are involved in Crime No.105/2022 registered by
Raipur Police Station, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable
under Sections 419, 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120B read with
Section 34 of IPC and in the said case, charge sheet has
already been filed against them. Modus operandi of accused
Nos.1 and 2 in the said case and in the present case are similar
in nature.
9. Accused No.5 was the Managing Director of the
Corporation at the relevant point of time. The material on
record would go to show that he has collected huge money as
Commission after fixed deposits of the Corporation were
transferred to Union Bank of India, M. G. Road Branch,
Bengaluru. Money was not only recovered from his car but also
from the house of his son’s friends. Even as against accused
– 12 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
No.5, a criminal case was registered in Crime No.191/2019 by
Magadi Road Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences
punishable under Sections 409, 408, 419, 420 and 120B of IPC,
and after investigation, charge sheet has been filed against
accused No.5 in the said case. Though it is brought to the
notice of this Court that the said proceedings has been stayed
by this Court in a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by
accused No.5, the fact remains that accused No.5 has been
charge sheeted for similar offences and challenge to the said
charge sheet is still pending consideration. Therefore, it cannot
be said that accused No.5 has no criminal antecedents.
10. Contention has been urged on behalf of these accused
persons that they were arrested after they had appeared before
the Investigation Officer in compliance of the Notice issued to
them under Section 41A of Cr.P.C. and therefore, compliance of
sub-section (3) of Section 41A of Cr.P.C. is required prior to
their arrest. According to them, reasons to arrest has not been
recorded in the present case by the Investigation Officer as
required under Section 41A(3) of Cr.P.C. They have also raised
a contention that grounds of arrest as required under Section
– 13 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
50(1) of Cr.P.C. and Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India,
has not been served in the present case immediately after their
arrest and therefore, they are entitled for bail.
11. Section 41A of Cr.P.C. reads as follows:-
“41A. Notice of appearance before police officer.-
(1) The police officer shall, in all cases where the
arrest of a person is not required under the provisions
of sub-section (1) of section 41, issue a notice
directing the person against whom a reasonable
complaint has been made, or credible information has
been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists that he
has committed a cognizable offence, to appear before
him or at such other place as may be specified in the
notice.
(2) Where such a notice is issued to any person,
it shall be the duty of that person to comply with the
terms of the notice.
(3) Where such person complies and continues
to comply with the notice, he shall not be arrested in
respect of the offence referred to in the notice unless,
for reasons to be recorded, the police officer is of the
opinion that he ought to be arrested.
– 14 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
(4) Where such person, at any time, fails to
comply with the terms of the notice or is unwilling to
identify himself, the police officer may, subject to such
orders as may have been passed by a competent
Court in this behalf, arrest him for the offence
mentioned in the notice.”
12. In the present case, arrest has not been made by the
Investigation Officer as provided under sub-section (1) of
Section 41 and on the other hand, notice has been issued in
compliance of Section 41A (1) of Cr.P.C. Accused Nos.2 and 5
in compliance of the terms of the Notice, had appeared before
the Investigation Officer and their statement was also recorded
by the Investigation Officer and after Investigation Officer was
satisfied that the aforesaid accused are required to be arrested,
the reasons for the same has been recorded by him in the diary
and thereafter, accused Nos.2 and 5 are arrested. Reasons that
are recorded for the arrest of accused in compliance of Section
41A(3) of Cr.P.C. are not required to be communicated to the
accused and the provision of law only states that said reasons
are required to be recorded which the Investigation Officer has
complied with in the present case. Even in the remand
– 15 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
application of the arrested accused, there is a mention of the
reasons for arresting the accused. There is also a mention that
these accused have not co-operated with the police for
investigation.
13. Section 50(1) of Cr.P.C. reads as follows:-
“50. Person arrested to be informed of grounds
of arrest and of right to bail.
(1) Every police officer or other person
arresting any person without warrant shall forthwith
communicate to him full particulars of the offence for
which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest.”
14. From a reading of the aforesaid provision of law, it is very
clear that only if the arrest of a person is made without
warrant, police officer/person arresting the accused needs to
communicate the accused the grounds of arrest. Section 41 of
Cr.P.C. provides for arrest without warrant. In the present
case, as stated earlier, arrest is not made by the police officer
exercising powers under Section 41 of Cr.P.C., but on the other
hand, arrest has been made as provided under Section 41A(3)
of Cr.P.C. and therefore, in my considered opinion, the
requirement of serving the grounds of arrest in writing to the
– 16 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
accused immediately after arrest as held by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal vs. Union of
India and Others – (2024) 7 SCC 576 and in the case of
Prabir Purkayastha vs. State (NCT of Delhi) – (2024) 8
SCC 254 does not arise in the present case.
15. The allegation against accused Nos.7 and 8, who are
businessman by avocation is that they have received
commission from the Bank for facilitating transfer of the fixed
deposits of the Corporation. Undisputedly, accused Nos.7 and 8
do not have any criminal antecedents. Accused Nos.3, 9 and
11, as against whom similar allegations are found in the charge
sheet, have been granted regular bail by the jurisdictional
Sessions Court. Though learned counsel for accused No.5 has
stated that on the ground of parity, accused No.5 is entitled for
bail since accused No.6 as against whom similar allegations are
found in the charge sheet, has been enlarged on bail by the
jurisdictional Sessions Court, the said contention is liable to be
rejected since accused No.6 does not have any criminal
antecedents whereas accused No.5 has antecedents of similar
nature and similar case was registered against him when he
– 17 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
was serving as District Manger in Ambedkar Development
Corporation, Bengaluru Urban District.
16. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manik
Madhukar Sarve (surpa) in paragraph Nos.25, 26 and 27 has
observed as follows:-
“25. In cases where the allegations coupled with
the materials brought on record by the
investigation and in the nature of economic offence
affecting a large number of people reveal the active
role of the accused seeking anticipatory or regular
bail, it would be fit for the Court granting such bail
to impose appropriately strict and additional
conditions. In the present case, even that has not
been done as the High Court has imposed usual
conditions simpliciter:
“8. The applicant be released on bail in
connection with Crime 217/2019, registered
with Police Station Kotwali, Nagpur, for
offences punishable under sections 409, 420,
467, 478, 471, 120-B of Penal Code, 1860,
Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of
Interest of Depositors (in Financial
Establishments) Act, on executing PR bond of
– 18 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024Rs. 16,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Thousand) with
one solvent surety of the like amount.
9. The applicant shall attend Economic
Offences Wing, Nagpur as and when required
by the Investigating Officer.
10. The applicant shall not, directly or
indirectly, make any attempt to influence the
witnesses or otherwise tamper with the
evidence.
11. The applicant shall not leave the country
without the permission of the trial Court.”
(emphasis supplied)
26. The High Court, we have no hesitation in
saying so, erred in law. Ergo, for reasons recorded
above and upon circumspect consideration of the
attendant facts and circumstances, we hold that the
discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge of
the High Court to grant bail to the respondent no. 1
was not in tune with the principles that
conventionally govern exercise of such power, a
plurality of which stand enunciated in the case-law
supra. Moreover, though respondent no. 1 had
already suffered incarceration for a period of about
six months at the time when bail was granted, yet
– 19 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
in view of the nature of the alleged offence, his
release on bail can seriously lead to dissipation of
the properties where investments have allegedly
been made out of Society funds. At the end of the
day, the interests of the victims of the scam have
also to be factored in.
27. Accordingly, the appeal succeeds. The
impugned order stands set aside. Respondent No. 1
is directed to surrender within a period of three
weeks from today, failing which the trial Court shall
proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that the
observations made hereinabove are limited to the
aspect of testing the legality of the impugned order.
They shall not be treated as definitive/conclusive
regarding respondent no. 1 or any other accused.
The trial Court in seisin shall proceed uninfluenced
and in accordance with law. Given the peculiar
circumstances, where bail is being cancelled after a
period of almost 3 years, it is deemed appropriate
to grant liberty to the respondent no. 1 to apply for
bail at a later period or in the event of a change in
circumstances. Needless to state, such application,
if and when preferred, shall be considered on its
own merits, without being prejudiced by the instant
judgment. The authorities concerned are directed to
render appropriate care and assistance as regards
the medical condition of the respondent no.1.”
– 20 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
17. Learned Addl. State Public Prosecutor has brought to the
notice of this Court that though charge sheet has been filed in
the present case, further investigation of the case is under
progress and on the basis of the complaint made by the Bank,
CBI has registered a separate case and has been investigating
the same. Since accused Nos.2 and 5, who have antecedents of
similar nature have indulged in committing similar offences
after being enlarged on bail in the earlier cases registered
against them, the chances of the said accused committing
similar offences cannot be ruled out. Under the circumstances,
I am of the opinion that the prayer made by accused Nos.2 and
5 for grant of regular bail needs to be rejected and the prayer
made by accused Nos.7 and 8 for grant of regular bail needs to
be answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following:-
ORDER
(i) Petitions insofar as accused Nos.2 and 5 in
Crl.P.No.11420/2024 and Crl.P.No.11395/2024 are dismissed.
(ii) Petitions insofar as accused Nos.7 and 8 in
Crl.P.No.11267/2024 and Crl.P.No.11786/2024 are allowed.
The petitioners/accused Nos.7 and 8 are directed to be
– 21 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
enlarged on bail in Crime No.118/2024 registered by High
Grounds Police Station, Benglauru City, for the offences
punished under Sections 120B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471
read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 13(1)(a) read with
Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988,
pending before the Court of XXIII Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge and Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption
Act), Bengaluru, subject to the following conditions:
a) Petitioners/accused Nos.7 and 8 shall
execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
each with two sureties for the likesum, to the
satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
b) The petitioners/accused Nos.7 and 8 shall
appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the
Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts their
appearance for valid reasons;
c) The petitioners/accused Nos.7 and 8 shall
not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the
prosecution witnesses;
d) The petitioners/accused Nos.7 and 8 shall
not involve in similar offences in future;
– 22 –
NC: 2024:KHC:52794
CRL.P No. 11267/2024
C/W CRL.P Nos. 11395/2024,
11420/2024, 11786/2024
e) The petitioners/accused Nos.7 and 8 shall
not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without
permission of the said Court until the case registered
against them is disposed off.
SD/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
DN