KABC010159842022
IN THE COURT OF THE LX ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH 61)
:Present :
Sri Narashimsa.M.V., B.Com., LL.B.,
LX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
Dated: This the 20th day of June, 2022
: Crl.Misc.No. 5954/2022:
PETITIONER:-
RESPONDENT :
Raghavendra Karanth
S/o Late Krishna Karanth
Aged about 54 years
R/at No. 536/4,
9th B Block, Asha Township,
Doddagubbi Village
Bengaluru.
(By Sri. S.Doreraju, Adv)
V/s
The State of Karnataka
By: Kothanur Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(Rep. by: Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
Petitioner /A-5 in Kothanur Police Station Crime No. 35/2022,
has filed this bail application under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of
bail
2
Crl.Misc.No.5954/2022
2. Brief facts of the case as forthcoming from the first
information is that Asst. General Manager of Karnataka Bank has
lodged first information wherein it is alleged that Muralidhar
(accused No.1) who was working as Clerk in Doddagubbi Branch
has mis-used his position, created false FD receipts, illegally
collected money from customers, dealt with their accounts without
there being any kind of authorization, forged and created several
documents. Upon internal verification it was found that around Rs
400 lakhs has been misappropriated by Muralidhar (accused No.1).
First information so lodged was registered as Crime No. 35/2022 for
the offence punishable under Sec. 408, 409, 420, 468, 470, 471,
474, 415, 416, 425, 463, 464 of IPC.
3. Petitioner/accused No.5 has urged the following grounds :
Petitioner is innocent has not committed any offence, he is
arrayed as accused No.2 in the crime stage, after completion of
investigation he is arrayed as accused No.5, the petitioner is no way
connected with the offence alleged against him, he hails from a
respectable family, is having aged parents to look after besides his
wife and children. Police alleged that the petitioner was absconding
in the remand application, voluntary statement of accused No.1
3
Crl.Misc.No.5954/2022
Muralidhar does not speak anything about the involvement of the
petitioner in this case. The petitioner has filed petition under Sec.
439 of Cr.P.C. second time in the changed circumstance of the case,
that is after filing of the charge sheet before the learned 4 th ACMM
which came to be registered in CC No. 170/85/2022, wherein this
petitioner is arrayed from accused No.2 to 5. No case is made out
against the petitioner, law of parity should be applied in granting bail
to accused as co-accused have been granted bail on the similar act
of facts and circumstances of the case, no allegation is made
against the petitioner except dereliction of duties, the presence of
the petitioner is not at all required for interrogation as charge sheet
has been filed, question of tampering witnesses or evidence does
not arise. Petitioner undertakes to abide by all the conditions that
may be imposed upon by this Court, will not hamper the
investigation or threaten the witnesses. Hence prayed for grant of
bail.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has filed objections to bail
application along with instructions given by I.O. In objections the
entire averments of first information are reiterated. In objections it is
stated that spot panchanama has been conducted, laptop, gold
4
Crl.Misc.No.5954/2022
ornaments, mobile phones are seized, petitioner/A-5 was arrested
and produced before Court. If petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is
every likelihood that he may commit similar offence, threaten the
witnesses and destruct the evidence. Hence prayed for rejection of
bail.
5. Heard the learned Advocate for petitioner and the learned
Public Prosecutor.
6. The point that arise for consideration is :
(1) Whether bail application filed by accused in
Kothanur Police Station Crime No. 35/2022
deserves to be allowed ?
7. My finding to the above point is in the Affirmative, for the
following :REASONS
8. Point No.1:
Petitioner herein at the time of production
before the learned Magistrate was arrayed as accused No.2, after
completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed.

In the
charge sheet petitioner herein is shown as accused No.5. Gist of
allegations as forthcoming in the charge sheet against accused No.5
is that, 5th accused received money from accused No.1, which
5
Crl.Misc.No.5954/2022
amount was deposited by accused No.5 in the account of his son-inlaw Someshwar and to fake FDs which accused No.1
created,
accused No.5 without verifying them, reposing faith in accused No.1
wound sign the said FD receipts.
9. Accused No.5/petitioner is in custody since 12.3.2022.
Along with bail application, copy of orders passed by the Hon’ble
High Court of Karnataka in Crl. Petition No. 3660/2022 is filed, in the
said petition accused No.2 was granted bail.
10. Copy of orders passed in Crl. Misc. No. 3636/2022 filed
by accused No.5 has also been produced. Entire investigation has
been completed, allegation against accused No.5 is of having
deposited the amount received by him from accused No.1 to the
Bank account of his son-in-law. It is the case of prosecution that
accused No.5 has signed the FD receipts since he had faith on
accused No.1. It is to be noted that during the period when the
offences are said to have taken place accused No.5 was on leave.
Role of accused No.5 in commission of the alleged offence is to be
proved in a full-fledged trial. Since accused No.2 has been granted
bail by Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka and other accused persons
have also been enlarged on bail, on the ground of parity accused
Crl.Misc.No.5954/2022
6
No.5can be enlarged on bail.

Offences alleged against accused
No.5 are not punishable with death or life imprisonment, there is no
direct allegation against accused No.5 by any of the customers,
accused No.5 appears to have put his signatures on FDs in the
routine course of his work, on the faith that his subordinates would
have done their job perfectly. Acts said to have been committed by
petitioner are matter of record
which cannnot be meddled or
tampered by petitioner, question they being destructed does not
arise. Hence,
I answer the above point in the Affirmative and
proceed to pass the following :
ORDER
Bail application filed by
Raghavendra Kamath
petitioner/A-5,
in Crime No. 35/2022 is hereby
allowed. Petitioner shall be enlarged on bail subject to
the following :
CONDITIONS
1. Petitioner shall execute personal bond for Rs
50,000/- with one surety for the likesum.
2. Petitioner shall not threaten the witnesses in
any manner.

7
Crl.Misc.No.5954/2022
3. Petitioner shall attend the Court on all dates of
hearing and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court
without prior permission.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, after corrections,
pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 20 th day of June, 2022)
(NARASHIMSA.M.V.)
LX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru
8
Crl.Misc.No.5954/2022