KABC010090572024
IN THE COURT OF LXVI ADDL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH67)
PRESENT
SHRI. JAYAPRAKASH A.
B.A.L., L.L.M.,
LXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru (CCH67)
Dated this the 7st day of June, 2024
Crl.Misc.No. 3212/2024
PETITIONER/S:
1. Sri. M. Venkatesh
Aged about 58 years,
Director,
Social Education Activity,
For Rural Child Health Development
(SEARCH)
(Accused No.1)
2. Smt. Manjula Joshi
Aged about 45 years,
Assistant Director,
Social Education Activity
For Rural Child Health Development
(SEARCH)
Both are at Basarikatti Road,
Kamatagi P.O., Hunagund Taluk,
Bagalkot District587120.
Crl.Misc.No.3212/2024
2
And also at Sector No.16,
Plat No.141, Near Sri Ambabhavani
Temple, Navanagar, Bagalkot District
587120.
(By Sri. N.R.Naik, Advocate)
V/s.
RESPONDENT/S:
1. Nabard Finance Services Limited
(NABFINS),
Represented by Mr. Venkatesh Nadigar,
Presently office at No.3072,
14th Cross, K.R.Road,
Banashankari 2nd stage,
Bengaluru560070.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
By SHO, Banashankari
Police Station,
Bangalore City
(Rep. by Public Prosecutor)
ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED UNDER
SECTION 438 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
This petition is filed by the petitioners under Section 438
of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for an order to grant
anticipatory bail and direct the respondent police to release the
petitioners
on
bail
in
the
event
of
their
arrest
in
C.C.No.23222/2019 for the offenses punishable Under Sections
403, 406, 407, 408, 409, 417, 418, 419, 420, 501 read with 34
of Indian Penal Code.
3
2.
Crl.Misc.No.3212/2024
It is the contention of the petitioners that they are
innocent of the offences alleged against them and they are not
involved in any offence as alleged by the complainant. On the
basis of a false complaint, the respondent police have registered
the case against them. The petitioners have been falsely
implicated in the case with an ulterior motive. Petitioners are
ready and willing to furnish surety to the satisfaction of the
court. Petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions imposed
by this court. Therefore, the petitioners have prayed for allowing
the petition and to grant anticipatory bail.
3. The notice of this petition is given to the learned public
prosecutor on behalf of the respondent police and the learned
public prosecutor has filed objections to the petition along with
the report of Investigating Officer submitting that the petition is
not maintainable either in law or on facts of the case. The
contentions of the petitioners put forth in the petition are false.
There are chances of petitioners absconding if they are released
on bail.
There are also chances of tampering with the
prosecution witnesses which may lead to hindrance in the
proper investigation of the case. Hence, for the reasons
mentioned in the objections, the learned public prosecutor has
prayed for dismissal of the petition.
Crl.Misc.No.3212/2024
4
4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the
petitioners and the learned public prosecutor on the petition.
Perused materials on record. On going through the materials,
the points that arise for my consideration are:
1.
Whether the petitioners have made
out sufficient grounds for grant of
anticipatory bail as sought for?
2.
What order?
5. After hearing the arguments of both the parties and on
considering the relevant materials on record, my findings on the
above points are as hereunder.
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:
first
respondent
and
It is alleged in the complaint that the
has
filed
a
private
complaint
in
P.C.R.No.3691/2018 with the allegation of misappropriation of
the fund which was paid by the public at large amount in to
Rs.37,29,759/ and the same has been misappropriate by the
petitioners and others accused persons. It is stated that
complainant is a non banking financial company providing loans
to agriculturists and micro finance by using public money the
accused persons are running a N.G.O and were entrusted with
Crl.Misc.No.3212/2024
5
recovery of money which was given self help groups.
The
petitioners and others collected money from public and without
depositing
the
misappropriated
same
before
the
complainant
company
same. Therefore the complainant has been
filed have complaint for the offences punishable under section
403, 406, 407, 408, 409, 417, 418, 419, 420, 501, 506 read with
section 34 of Indian penal code.
8. The contention of the petitioners is that petitioners are
innocent of the offences alleged against them and not committed
any offences as alleged in the complaint. The petitioners have
produced copy of private complaint and order sheet. It can be
gathered from the objection statement filed by the respondent
No.1 that court has taken cognizance of the offence. The
petitioners have to undergo trail. Therefore, it is not desirable on
the part of this court at this stage to come to a conclusion that
the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against them
and hence, any of the contentions of the petitioners that they are
innocent of the offences alleged against petitioners does not
merit consideration at this stage.
9. In so far as nature of offence is concerned, even if it is
accepted for the sake of arguments that there is prima facie case
against the petitioners for the alleged offence, the said offence is
not punishable with death or in alternative imprisonment for
life. Hence, absolutely there is no reason to deny the benefit of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Further the petitioners have
produced copy of bail order in criminal mics No.3487/2024 were
6
Crl.Misc.No.3212/2024
in anticipatory bail was granted to other accused persons in the
same case. Therefore on the basis of parity the petitioners are
entitled for bail.
10. However, it is to be noted that the petition averments,
documents produced by the petitioners and prosecution papers
available on record indicates that the petitioners are the
permanent residents of Navanagar, Bagalkot district. Hence, it
appears that there are no chances of absconding if petitioner is
granted anticipatory bail.
11. It is the apprehension of the respondent No.1 that the
petitioners may flee away from justice. Any such apprehension
and contentions put forth in the objections can be suitably met
with by imposing proper and necessary conditions on the
petitioners while granting anticipatory bail. As mentioned herein
above, there is absolutely no special ground made out by the
respondent to reject the petition filed by the petitioners seeking
anticipatory bail. In the circumstances the petitioners have
made out sufficient grounds for grant of anticipatory bail as
prayed for. Consequently, point No.1 is answered in the
Affirmative.
12. Point No.2: From the discussion made herein above,
it is clear that this petition deserves to be allowed. In the result I
proceed to pass the following:
Crl.Misc.No.3212/2024
7
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioners
under Section 438 of Code of Criminal
Procedure is hereby allowed.
The respondent police is directed to
release the petitioners on bail on their
executing
personal bond
for a sum of
Rs.50,000/ (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)
each, with one solvent surety for the life
some to the satisfaction of the respondent
police/ magistrate in the event of petitioner’s
arrest in C.C. No.23222/2019 of
for the
offenses punishable under Sections 403,
406, 407, 408, 409, 417, 418, 419, 420, 501,
506 read with section 34 of Indian penal
code. , subject to the following;
CONDITIONS:
1.
The petitioner shall appear before the
concerned Investigating Officer or
jurisdictional magistrate within 15 days
from the date of this order without fail.
2.
The petitioners shall not directly or
indirectly, make any inducement, threat
or promise to any person acquainted
with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade them from disclosing any facts
Crl.Misc.No.3212/2024
8
to the court or to
Investigating Officer.
the
concerned
3.
The petitioners shall not tamper with
the prosecution witnesses in any
manner.
4.
If the petitioners violate any of the
conditions of bail during the pendency
of the case, the bail granted shall stand
cancelled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer GradeIII online, typed by
her directly, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open
Court on this 7th day of June, 2024)
(JAYAPRAKASH. A)
LXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru
Digitally signed
by
JAYAPRAKASH
JAYAPRAKASH ANGARAKODY
ANGARAKODY
Date:
2024.06.11
15:39:41 +0530