Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024 KABC010085862024 IN THE COURT OF THE XXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH 9) AND HOLDING CONCURRENT CHARGE OF LXIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH 70) BANGALORE CITY Dated this the 24rd day of April, 2024 PRESENT Sri. Hareesha A., B.A.,LL.B, XXVII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH 9) and also holding concurrent charge of the court of 69th Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH 70). Crl.Misc.No.3040/2024 Petitioner: 1. Mr. Vishnu Mahadev Matere S/o. Mr. Mahadev Matere Aged about 66 Years Managing Director M/s. V.M. Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited At: Matere House, Sector No.14 Pradhikaran Gate No.62 Boradewadi, Moshi, Tal­Haveli Pune – 412 105

2. Ms. Sindhu Vishnu Matere W/o. Mr. Vishnu Mahadev Matere Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024

Aged about 57 years Director, M/s. V.M. Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited At: Matere House, Sector No.14 Pradhikaran Gate No.62 Boradewadi, Moshi, Tal­Haveli Pune – 412 105

3. Mr. Mahesh Maruti Matere S/o. Mr. Maruti Matere Aged about 44 years Director: M/s. V.M. Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited At: Matere House, Sector No.14 Pradhikaran Gate No.62 Boradewadi, Moshi, Tal­Haveli Pune – 412 105 . (By Sri. Anand Muttalli, Advocate )

­V/S­ Respondent : State of Karnataka by Indiranagar PS, B`lore (Represented by Public Prosecutor) ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED U/SEC. 438 OF CR.P.C. The petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this court under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) citing a reasonable apprehension of imminent arrest by the respondent Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024 police, in connection with Crime No. 53/2024, wherein the petitioners stands as accused No.3 to 5, registered for the offences punishable u/sec. 34, 120B, 421, 406, 420 and 468 of Indian Panel Code.

2. The petitioners pleading false implication and absence of

primafacie material supporting the commission of offences necessitating punishable u/sec. 120B, 421, 406, 420 and 468 read with sec.34, of IPC, expressing genuine apprehension of imminent arrest by the respondent police, sought for their release on pre­ arrest bail.

3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has filed objection

contending that, there exists prima­facie material on record indicating that the petitioners have allegedly committed the offences in question, hence sought to dismiss the petition.

4. I have heard the argument and perused the petition

averments. The point that would arise for my determination is:

1. Whether the petitioners have made out any grounds to enlarge them on bail u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C.?

2. What order? Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024

5. My answer is in the affirmative for the following;

REASONS

6. POINT NO.1: The Manager at Pragathi Inframaterials

Trading Pvt Ltd having its office situated at No. 467/468, Shri Krishna Temple Road, 1st Stage, Indiranagar, Bangalore – 560 038 (herein after referred as "Complainant"), filed a complaint with the respondent Police, alleging that the accused No.1, Zetwerk Pvt Ltd., Company which is a platform between the buyers and suppliers connected the accused No.2 company, which is engaged in the business of construction of Government based Road projects, Bridge & Flyover projects and Building projects. Accused No.3 to 5 are the directors of accused No.2 company. It is alleged that accused No.2 company is acting as intermediary introduced the accused No.2 company and informed that the accused No.2 had bid for various tenders and and was therefore able to secure tenders for the construction works of Phase – II for lanning of Khed Sinner Section of NH­50 comprising of the stretches of kalamb bypass and other projects of the State of Maharashtra. Further, it is alleged that the Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024 accused No.1 procured the raw materials i.e., Cement, Steel, Bitumen, Sand etc., for the execution of the works from the complainant company on trade basis and promised to make payments through escrow account. However, it is alleged that in the month of April 2023, 1st accused has stopped making payments with the company for the goods supplied. Upon constant follow up and enquiry with the Zetwerk, it assured the complainant company that accused No.2 had facilitated to get the escrow account empanelled with the end customer National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) and had shared a copy of the Letter dated sent to NHAI dated 23.03.2022 said to be issued to NHAI, by asking through which the accused No.2 asked to shift the account to YES Bank Escrow Account. The said letter dated 23.03.2022 had a seal of NHAI dated 25.03.2022. It is alleged that using the said letter, the accused No.1 company, Zetwerk company had induced the complainant company to believe that soon they would be receiving funds into the said YES bank Escrow Account and the same would be paid to he complainant company. As per the Books of account maintained by the complainant, the accused persons are liable to pay a sum of Rs. Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024 8,50,92,423/­ as on 31.03.2023 to the complainant company. It is alleged that when accused persons have failed to make the payment, the company had conducted internal investigation wherein it came to the knowledge of the complainant company that NHAI has never received any letter dated 23.03.2023 and seal found on the letter is forged. Therefore the present complaint was lodged.

7. I have perused the entire complaint averments and

entire documents produced by the petitioners and learned public prosecutor including the material supplied agreement dated 16.03.2022 through the accused No.1 and accused No.2 entered into an agreement to supply the materials. According to the terms outlined in the agreement, accused No.1 purportedly consented to provide raw materials to accused No.1. Notably, no contractual arrangement existed between the complainant company and accused No.2 to 5. The sole accusation leveled against the present petitioners is their purported roles as directors of accused No.1, wherein they allegedly issued a letter dated 23.03.2022, contested by the complainant as a falsified document. The complainant asserts that Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024 an internal investigation revealed the letter's seal and signature to be fraudulent. However, there is no assertion that the petitioners provided any misleading financial information. Moreover, it is my considered perspective that the aforementioned document was issued by accused No.2, presently identified as Zetwerk company, thus precluding definitive attribution to the petitioners as parties responsible for its transmission with accused No.1. As per the agreement, the establishment of an escrow Account was incumbent upon the purchasers, who are obligated to furnish corresponding details to the suppliers. It is noteworthy that the complainant purportedly dispatched goods sans receipt of escrow Account particulars, and no approval was obtained to alter the escrow Account arrangement. Upon scrutiny of the available documentation, the allegations seemingly exhibit characteristics more aligned with civil disputes, contrived by the complainant to imbue a criminal complexion upon the matter. Furthermore, given that the prosecution's case predominantly relies on documentary evidence, I am inclined to opine that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is unwarranted. Consequently, no legal impediment Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024 exists to preclude the petitioners' release on bail. The alleged offences are though non bailable in nature, they are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. To address the prosecution's concerns regarding the potential flight risk, stringent conditions can be imposed as a measure to mitigate such apprehensions. Accordingly the Point No.1 is answered in the affirmative.

8. Point No.2: By considering the above over all reasons this

court proceed to pass the following;

ORDER

The petition filed u/sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. by the Petitioner is hereby allowed. In the event of arrest of petitioner, in connection with Cr. No. 53/2024 registered by the respondent police station for the offence punishable u/sec. 120B, 421, 406, 420 and 468 R/w. Sec 34 of IPC, the respondent police hereby directed to release them on bail, on obtaining their personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/­ with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating officer, subject to the following conditions. Crl. Misc. No.3040/2024

1. The petitioners shall appear before the police within 15 days from the date of this order and as and when summoned for the purpose of investigation or trial.

2. The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper with the Prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

3. The petitioners shall not commit similar offence.

4. The petitioners shall cooperate for investigation.

(Dictated to the Stenographer Grade ­ III, transcript thereof is corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 24th day of April, 2024) (Hareesha A.) XXVII Addl. CC & SJ holding c/c of 69th Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,Bangalore.