KABC010080002024 IN THE COURT OF LXV ADDL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-66) PRESENT SHRI. HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R. B.A.L., L.L.B., LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, C/cLXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,(CCH-67) Bengaluru. Dated this the 27th day of March, 2024 Crl.Misc.No. 2853 of 2024 PETITIONER/S:- Avinash, S/o Maddurappa, Aged about 29 years, R/at 18th Main, 41st C Cross, Jayanagara 9th Block, VTC, Bengaluru south, Bengaluru. Also at Urban Design.in, No.29, 41st Cross, 9th Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru 560 069. (By Sri.GC Lohith Kumar., Advocate) V/s. RESPONDENT/S:- STATE OF KARNATAKA, By Amruthahally Police Station, 2 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024 Bengaluru. (Rep. by Public Prosecutor) ORDER ON PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in Crime No.345/2023 PCR.No.84/2023 registered by the respondent Amruthahally Crime police for the offence punishable under sections 406 and 420 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case.-
The complainant has filed a private complaint in PCR.No.84/2023 alleging that the complaint Adhishakthi Cars Pvt.Ltd is a registered company and running business of car show room, the accused was referred by one Manpreet Kaur of Bonito Designs and he was referred to the complainant for interior design work, in this regard the accused has given interior design fabrication and PVD Coating work to the accused for a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- + GST at 18% vide Quotation dated 15.04.2022 by letter NO.ACPL/SNN/01 dated 9.05.2022 for renovation of the complainant office. The accused has per the purchase order has to complete the PVD work within 25 days from the date of the purchase order. The payment terms was 70% was to be paid as advance and the balance of 30% after completion and handing and certification of quality of work. Accordingly, the complainant paid Rs.3,77,300/- as advance to the accused on 10.05.2022 by cheque No.735826 in favour of accused and the accused has visited the complainant office and taken measurements for 2 to 3 times before getting the advance amount after getting advance he did not do the said work and as per the purchase order the accused was supposed to have completed the work within 15 days from the date of receipt of advance. 3 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024 The complainant having called the accused several time the accused did not answer his phone calls nor has completed the work, alleging the same complainant has lodged the complaint before Amruthahalli police but since the police have not taken any action against the accused, the complainant filed PCR No.84/2023 before the magistrate Court, the said complaint having referred for investigation the police have completed the investigation and have registered case against the accused in Cr.No.345/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC.
3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the same has preferred
this bail petition on the following among other grounds. The petitioner submits that he is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in the said case. The petitioner has also contended that there is delay of more than 5 months in lodging the compliant. The petitioner has contended that the complaint averments does not attract the ingredients of the alleged offences. The petitioner has contended that the complainant had handed over the design to the petitioner mean while the work was delayed due to the complainant frequently kept on changing the design from time to time. The petitioner further submits that he is innocent of the alleged offences and the alleged offence are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioner submits that he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this Court and co-operate with the investigation. Hence, prays to allow the bail petition.
4. After service of notice, the learned Public Prosecutor has
appeared and filed objection contending that the offence alleged 4 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024 against the petitioner are grievous in nature and also further contended that complaint averments prima facie shows that the petitioner has involved in the alleged offences. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that as the investigation is still in progress at this stage if the bail petition of the accused is allowed there is every chance of of the petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroying the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.
5. Heard the arguments. Now the points that arise for my
consideration.-
1. Whether the petitioner has made out sufficient ground to allow the petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C?
2. What order?
6. My answer to the above points are.-
Point No.1:– In the Affirmative Point No.2:– As per final order for the following
REASONS
7. Point No.1:- The petitioner counsel has addressed the
arguments contending that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in the said case. The petitioner counsel has also contended that there is delay of more than 5 months in lodging the compliant. The petitioner counsel has contended that the complaint averments does not attract the ingredients of the alleged offences. The petitioner counsel has contended that the complainant had handed over the design to the petitioner mean while 5 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024 the work was delayed due to the complainant frequently kept on changing the design from time to time. The petitioner counsel further contended that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and the alleged offence are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioner counsel submits that petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this Court and co- operate with the investigation. Hence, prays to allow the bail petition.
8. The learned Public Prosecutor has addressed the
arguments contending that the offences alleged against the petitioner are grievous in nature and also further contended that the complaint averments prima facie shows that the accused persons have involved in the alleged offence. The learned Public Prosecutor has also further contended that at this stage, if the bail petition of the petitioner is allowed there is every chance of the petitioner threatening the prosecution witnesses, destroying the evidence, abscond and hamper the trial. Hence, prays to reject the bail petition.
9. On perusal of the records it is noticed that the
complainant has filed a private complaint in PCR.No.84/2023 alleging that the complaint Adhishakthi Cars Pvt.Ltd is a registered company and running business of car show room, the accused was referred by one Manpreet Kaur of Bonito Designs and he was referred to the complainant for interior design work, in this regard the accused has given interior design fabrication and PVD Coating work to the accused for a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- + GST at 18% vide Quotation dated 15.04.2022 by letter NO.ACPL/SNN/01 dated 9.05.2022 for renovation of the complainant office. The accused has per the purchase order has to complete the PVD work within 25 days from the date of the purchase order. The payment terms was 70% was to be paid as advance and 6 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024 the balance of 30% after completion and handing and certification of quality of work. Accordingly, the complainant paid Rs.3,77,300/- as advance to the accused on 10.05.2022 by cheque No.735826 in favour of accused and the accused has visited the complainant office and taken measurements for 2 to 3 times before getting the advance amount after getting advance he did not do the said work and as per the purchase order the accused was supposed to have completed the work within 15 days from the date of receipt of advance. The complainant having called the accused several time the accused did not answer his phone calls nor has completed the work, alleging the same complainant has lodged the complaint before Amruthahalli police but since the police have not taken any action against the accused, the complainant filed PCR No.84/2023 before the magistrate Court, the said complaint having referred for investigation the police have completed the investigation and have registered case against the accused.
10. On perusal of the records it is noticed that the offences
alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC. The offence alleged against the petitioner are not punishable with imprisonment for life or death. The petitioner has contended that he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this court and also to co operate with investigation, as the case is still under the stage of investigation, at this stage it cannot be said that the petitioner has involved in the alleged offence. The guilt of the petitioner has to be proved during the course of trial as the case is still under the stage of investigation, the petitioner having contended that he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions and also co-operate with the investigation, the apprehension of the prosecution can be satisfied by imposing stringent conditions. Admittedly, the petitioner is 7 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024 the resident of the address shown in the cause title. If at all during the course of trial, the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the petitioner, he can be dealt with in accordance with law. Considering all these facts, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be enlarged on bail by imposing certain conditions, which would meet the apprehension of prosecution. Accordingly, I answer the point No.1 in the Affirmative.
11. Point No.2:- In view of the findings given on point No.1, I
proceed to pass the following.-
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioners/ accused under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is allowed. The respondent Amruthahalli police are directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.345/2023 PCR No.84/2023 registered by the Amruthahally police for the offences punishable under Sections Sections 406, 420 of IPC on execution of personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum subject to the following CONDITIONS:-
1. The petitioner shall appear before the court on all dates of hearing.
2. The petitioner shall appear before the IO whenever he is called upon for the purpose of investigation.
3. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not threaten, induce 8 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024
allure the prosecution witnesses in what so ever manner.
4. The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal activity.
5. The petitioner shall produce the permanent address proof document.
(Dictated to the Judgment writer, transcribed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this 27th day of March, 2024) (HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R) LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, C/c LXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,(CCH-67) Bengaluru. 9 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024 Order pronounced in open Court vide separate order with following operative portion:
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioner/ accused under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is allowed. The respondent Amruthahalli police are directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.345/2023 PCR No.84/2023 registered by the Amruthahally police for the offences punishable under Sections Sections 406, 420 of IPC on execution of personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum subject to the following CONDITIONS:-
1. The petitioner shall appear before the court on all dates of hearing.
2. The petitioner shall appear before the IO whenever he is called upon for the purpose of investigation.
3. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not threaten, 10 Crl.Misc.No.2853/2024
induce allure the prosecution witnesses in what so ever manner.
4. The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal activity.
5. The petitioner shall produce the permanent address proof document.
LXV Addl. CC & SJ, C/c LXVI Addl. CC & SJ, (CCH-67) Bengaluru.