1 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 KABC010222542022 IN THE COURT OF THE LVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH 57) : Present : Sri.T.Govindaiah, B.Com., LL.B., LVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Dated this the 23rd Day of August, 2022. Crl.Misc.N o.8175/2022 PETITIONER 1. Mr. Atish Kumar S/o Ram Prakash Jha Director at M/s Acorp Consultants Pvt.Ltd. Having office at: Trend India Business Centre Private Limited H.M.Tower, 5th Floor, Brigade Road, Bengaluru ­560001

2. Mr. Abhik Roy S/o Chanchal Kumar Roy, Aged about 38 years Director at M/s Acorp Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Having office at: Trend India Business Centre Private Limited H.M.Tower, 5th floor, Brigade Road Bengaluru ­560 001

(By Sri.Anupam Agarwal Advocate) 2 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 V/s RESPONDENT State of Karnataka By Ashok Nagar police station, Bengaluru. (Rep. by: Public Prosecutor)

ORDER

This is a petition filed by the petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest on the complaint of Mr.Santhosh Nichani for the offences punishable under Sec.420, 405 and 406 of IPC.

2. Petitioners have sought for anticipatory bail on the

grounds that, they are innocent and have been falsely implicated. They are the permanent residents of Bengaluru. They are law abiding citizen. No prima facie case is registered against the petitioners. The dispute between the complainant and petitioners are civil in nature. Just to tarnish the image of the petitioners company and to harass them the complainant had filed false complaint. They hail from respectable family with good moral values. The offences alleged are not punishable with death or life imprisonment. 3 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 They undertakes to appear before the court regularly. They are ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed.

3. The prosecution has filed statement of objections

that as per the information received from respondent police, no case has been registered against the petitioners in their police station on the complaint of complainant. The petitioners had filed this petition only on imaginary ground. Hence petitioners are not entitled for bail.

4. Heard the arguments of both sides.

5. The following points arise for my determination:­

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled for anticipatory bail as provided under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?

2. What order?

6. My findings on the above said points are as

follows; Point No.1 : In the Affirmative. Point No.2 : As per final order, for the following :­ 4 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 R E A S O N S

7. Point No.1:­ On perusal of the prosecution

papers, the petitioners have produced copies of their adhar cards, letter issued by the Police inspector in favour of petitioners, reply notice issued by the petitioners to the Police inspector, work order, legal notice issued by the complainant, reply notice to the complainant, copy of plaint in O.S.No.4850/2022, copy of case status and mediation application form.

8. The petitioners have contended that, they are the

directors of a company under the name of M/s Acorp Consultants Pvt. Ltd and they are engaged in the business of interior designs. On 07.08.2022 the petitioners have received notice issued by Santacruz police station, Mumbai calling upon them to present before the station for enquiry/ recording their statements with regard to a complaint filed by one Mr.Santhosh Nichani who is the proprietor of M/s Klass Interior. The petitioner engaged the said complainant company as a vendor for supply and installation of Modular 5 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 Furniture at three sites for petitioner's clients M/s E20PEN Pvt., Ltd. As per the mutual agreement the complainant was supposed to supply the modular furniture within 40­50 days and complete the installation within the next 6 days post ­delivery. Accordingly they were agreed that, payment of 45% of the total amount shall be in advance and on the date of issuance of purchase order, Payment of 45% of the total amount upon delivery of the material on the site and balance amount to be paid in 7 days from the date of completion, handover documents and final bill submission. Accordingly the petitioners were issued three purchase order and the same was accepted by the complainant subject to advance payment of Rs.88,86,670/­. But the complainant failed to perform their contractual obligations and failed to adhere to timely delivery. Accordingly the petitioners have terminated the work order and demanded the complainant to refund the amount paid in advance along with interest at 18%. Therefore the complainant lodged the complaint against the petitioners alleging the breach of contract. 6 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022

9. It is the arguments of the petitioners that, the

complainant had mala filed intention to defraud the petitioner. Due to the act of the complainant the petitioners have faced lot of face loss in front of their clients. The complaint lodged by the complainant is only with an intention to defame the image of the petitioners company and to harass them.

10. It is also true that no FIR is registered against the

petitioners. But registration of FIR is not a condition precedent, mere apprehension is enough to grant bail. On perusal of the records and notice issued by the complainant, on the complaint of complainant the FIR may be registered and the investigation may be done. The petitioners contends that the complainant is making false allegations. However it is the matter of investigation. Further the petitioners have produced letter issued by the Police inspector in favour of petitioners, reply notice issued by the petitioners to the Police inspector, work order, legal notice issued by the complainant, reply notice to the complainant, copy of plaint in 7 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 O.S.No.4850/2022, copy of case status and mediation application form. Under such circumstances the petitioners are entitled for anticipatory bail. Hence in my considered view the petitioners deserves for grant of bail by exercising the powers conferred u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. Accordingly this Point No.1 is in the affirmative.

11. Point No.2: By considering the above over all

reasons this court proceed to pass the following;

ORDER

Bail petition filed u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. by the Petitioners is allowed. Petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in the crime to be registered against them on the basis of the complaint to be lodged by the Santhosh Nichani for the offence punishable u/sec. 420, 405 and 406 of IPC, on executing his personal bond for Rs.50,000/­ each with 1 surety for the likesum on the following conditions. 8 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022

1. The petitionerd shall appear before IO within 10 days from the date of this order.

2. The Petitionerd shall not tamper with the Prosecution witnesses either directly or

indirectly in any manner.

3. they shall co­operate for investigation

by the concerned police and regularly appear before concerned court as and when required.

4. They shall not abscond from the ordinary residence and they should furnish the

address proof to the concerned police.

5. They shall not involve in any kind of

offence.

6. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of

the court without prior permission. If any of the above conditions violates the IO is at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer , corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 23rd Day of August, 2022) (T.Govindaiah) LVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. 9 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 10 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 11 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 12 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022 Order pronounced in open Court (Vide separate order)

ORDER

Bail petition filed u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. by the Petitioners is allowed. Petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in the crime to be registered against them on the basis of the complaint to be lodged by the Santhosh Nichani for the offence punishable u/sec. 420, 405 and 406 of IPC, on executing his personal bond for Rs.50,000/­ each with 1 surety for the likesum on the following conditions.

1. The petitionerd shall appear before IO within 10 days from the date of this order. 13 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022

2. The Petitionerd shall not tamper with the Prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly in any manner.

3. they shall co­operate for investigation by the concerned police and regularly appear before concerned court as and when required.

4. They shall not abscond from the ordinary residence and they should furnish the address proof to the concerned police.

5. They shall not involve in any kind of offence.

6. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.

If any of the above conditions violates the IO is at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. LVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Benguru. 14 Crl.Misc.No.8175/2022