Crl. Misc. No.3104/2024 KABC010087502024 IN THE COURT OF THE LXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL, SESSIONS JUDGE: BENGALURU CITY Dated this the 06 th day of April, 2024 -: PRESENT :- SMT.NISHARANI A.C., B.A., LL.B., III ACC & SJ, Bengaluru C/C LXI ACC & SJ Bangalore, (CCH-62) CRL. MISC. No.3104/2024 Petitioner/s : 1. Hemanth Kumar.G S/o.Govindappa.M Aged about 30 years R/a.Gejadahalli Dasanapura Shivanapura Hobli Bengaluru-562 163. (By Sri.Raksith.R, Adv.) V/s. Respondent : The State by Yelahanka New Town Police Station Bengaluru. (Rep. by Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru.) Crl. Misc. No.3104/2024 ORDER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION ONE FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 438 OF Cr.P.C. This criminal Mis. Petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking the relief of anticipatory bail in relation to the case bearing No-Cr.No.120/2024, which is registered by the Yelahanka New Town Police Station, Bengaluru alleging that petitioner has committed the offences punishable under Section 403, 415, 420 R/w. Section 34 of IPC.

2. The petitioner contents that he is innocent of the

alleged offences and he is the sole proprietor of a logistic company and running the same under the name and style 'SLV Logistics' and complainant used to borrow money from the petitioner on regular basis via cash, goolge pay & phone pay and in order to repay the said borrowed amount the complainant had issued cheques for various amount drawn on Federal bank, Bengaluru and when the petitioner presented the said cheques for encashment with his banker the said cheques returned unpaid with an endorsement 'payment stopped by Drawer' and hence the petitioner had initiated a case against the complainant and the complainant only with an intention to wreak vengeance against the petitioner has filed a false case against him and the alleged Crl. Misc. No.3104/2024 offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life & the dispute between the parties is of civil in nature and he has no bad antecedences and he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this court and he is also ready to offer solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Court for his release on bail, hence he is entitled for bail.

3. On the other hand the learned Public Prosecutor has

filed his objections along with the report of the I.O. & opposed the above application that the grounds urged for seeking anticipatory bail are not satisfactory & the materials placed on record prima-facie discloses the involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged offences and now at this stage if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail then he may threaten, abscond and tamper the prosecution witnesses & accordingly prayed for rejection of the bail petition.

4. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the

points that arise for my consideration are as follows; 1) Whether the anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., deserves to be allowed? 2) To what Order? Crl. Misc. No.3104/2024

5. I have carefully perused the entire materials available

on record and heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

6. Now, my findings on the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1 – In Affirmative with conditions Point No.2 – As per final Order, for the following; R E A S O N S

7. Point No.1:- It is alleged by the complainant that he

is owning transport vehicle and petitioner is running logistic company and complainant was attaching her commercial transport vehicles to the company of the petitioner and complainant inorder to improve her business wanted to purchase new vehicle and for which she intended to borrow loan from M/s.Cholamandalam Financial Services situated at Yelahanka and at the time the accused No.2 introduced himself as the employee of the said M/s.Cholamandalam Financial Services and had taken cheques and KYC Documents for the purpose of loan and the said loan was not sanctioned and complainant requested the accused No.2 to return the said cheque but the said accused No.2 sought for some time and later the said cheques were with the petitioner and petitioner is demanding Rs.10 lakhs for return of the said cheques and hence the PCR was filed before the 4th ACMM Bengaluru in PCR No.15027/2023 & being aggrieved by the Crl. Misc. No.3104/2024 FIR registered the petitioner has come up with this petition for grant of bail for the alleged offence punishable under Section 403, 415, 420 R/w. Section 34 of IPC.

8. Now, it is the contention of the petitioner that he is

innocent of the alleged offences and he has not at all committed the alleged offences and he is ready and willing to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by the court for his release on bail.

9. On the other hand though the prosecution has

opposed the case of the petitioner that if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail then he may threaten, abscond and tamper the prosecution witnesses is concerned, the same do no hold any water as the cause title of the petition, copy of the FIR, copy of PCR No.15027/2023 & copy of the Aadhar card one produced by him shows that he is permanent resident of Bengaluru and as such his presence can be easily secured before the court & I.O.

10. I am aware that this Court cannot and is not

supposed to sift the evidence made available by the prosecution at the time of deciding the bail petition. However, only for the purpose of deciding that whether the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail or not, I discuss the facts alleged Crl. Misc. No.3104/2024 by the prosecution and whatever I say, while disposing of this bail petition, cannot be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the of the main case.

11. And more over since the alleged offences under

Section 403, 415, 420 R/w. Section 34 of IPC are not at all punishable with death or life imprisonment and since the alleged offences against the petitioner appears to be a civil in nature and since in the ruling of 2020(1) KCCR SN 29 (SC) it has been clearly held that – 'When the matter is civil in nature, the continuation of criminal proceedings will be abuse process of law' and since the alleged offences against the petitioner has to be decided through a thorough trial and since the apprehension of the prosecution could be met by imposing stringent conditions then looking into the nature and gravity of the alleged offences, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a prima-facie case for grant of anticipatory bail subject to conditions and accordingly, I have answered the above point No.1 in affirmative.

12. Point No.2 :- In view of the discussion made on

point No.1 and further holding it in the affirmative, I proceed to pass the following:- Crl. Misc. No.3104/2024 O R D E R The anticipatory bail petition one filed by the petitioner u/s 438 of Cr.P.C., is hereby allowed subject to following conditions;

1. That in the event of arrest of the

petitioner in Cr. No.120/2024 of respondent Police he shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum amount.

2. That the petitioner shall not hold any

threat to the complainant and shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

3. That the petitioner shall not leave the

jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.

4. That the petitioner shall furnish his

residential address proof and that of his surety.

5. That the petitioner shall not indulge in

similar type of offences in future.

6. That the petitioner shall appear before

the trial court regularly without fail on receipt of the summons. Crl. Misc. No.3104/2024

7. That if the petitioner fails to obey any

of the above said conditions, then this bail order automatically stands cancelled. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 06th day of April, 2024). (NISHARANI A.C) C/C LXI ACC & SJ, B’luru.