KABC010084352024 Presented on : 26-03-2024 Registered on : 26-03-2024 Decided on : 06-04-2024 Duration : 0 years, 1 month, 10 days IN THE COURT OF THE LXIV ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-65) AT BENGALURU) Dated this 6th day of April 2024 -: P R E S E N T :- Smt. Kalpana M.S., B.Sc., LL.M.,PGD-CLCF., LXIV ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, CCH-65, BENGALURU CITY. Crl.Misc.No. 2977 /2024 PETITIONER : Sri.Deepak S Sunderjan, S/o.N.Sheshadri, Aged about 43 years, R/at.Krishna Diamond Apartment, B-Block, Flat No.002, 20th Main, Sahakar Nagar, Bengaluru-092. (By Sri. Shahji T Veghese, Advocate) 2 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 /Vs/ RESPONDENT : State of Karnataka by Ashok Nagar, Police Station, Bengaluru. (Rep. By Learned Public Prosecutor) ORDERS ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S.438 OF CR.P.C. Petitioner/accused has filed this petition U/s.438 of Code Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.,) seeking anticipatory bail in Cr.No.165/2024 of Ashokanagar, police station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable U/s.403, 405, 415, 418, 420, 120, 120-B r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.) pending on the file of III-Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the

State has filed objections statement along with report of the Investigating Officer opposing the bail petition. 3 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024

3. For the purpose of brevity, the facts

mentioned in the petition and objections will be mentioned at appropriate stage of the orders.

4. Heard arguments. Perused the materials on record.

5. The points do arise for my consideration are;

1. Whether petitioner/accused is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail U/s.438 of Code of Criminal Procedure?

2. What Order?

6. For the reasons stated hereinafter, my findings on the above points are as follows;

Point No.1: In the Affirmative Point No.2: As per final order for the following:- R E A S O N S

7. POINT No.1:- Along with petition, petitioner

has produced certified copies of PCR No.206/2022, F.I.R 4 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 and order sheet in PCR.No.206/2023. Perused the same.

8. The facts set out in the chargesheet, in brief,

is as under; The complainant M/s Eagle Security Agency filed PCR No.206/2022 alleging that the company entered into agreement dated 23.07.2022 with one Prabhakaran and Samson Anthony at the instance of their employee Sharan. Accordingly, complainant has transferred Rs.10,00,000/- to the bank account of the petitioner. Even after lapse of one month from the date of agreement, the complainant has not received the work order. When the company demanded for return of Rs.10,00,000/- from the petitioner, he has issued seven blank cheques which returned unpaid on presentation, thereby all the accused persons cheated the complainant. Private complaint was referred to the 5 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 respondent police for investigation. They have registered a Cr.No.165/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 405, 415, 418, 420, 120, 120-B read with Section 34 of IPC and proceeded with the investigation.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused

vehemently argued that, he is innocent of the alleged offences. He has not committed said offences. He has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no intention to cheat or deceive the complainant right from the beginning and the alleged offences mentioned in the FIR and PCR does not attract against the petitioner. The complainant has not produced any agreement or contracts, which clearly shows that he has filed this case with malafide intention to extract the money. There is cheque bounce case pending in C.C. No.55260/2023 between the complainant and the petitioner. As there are no grounds for the complainant, he registered a false 6 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 case without providing proper documents. The entire transaction is civil in nature and the complainant is giving a colour of criminal case. The above said allegations are non bailable in nature. The petitioner will abide by the terms and conditions of this court. The petitioner undertakes that he will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. The petitioner is under apprehension of arrest. If bail is not granted, his defense will be put to jeopardy and hence prayed to enlarge him on bail.

10. The Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently

argued that, the petitioner has committed heinous offence. The investigation is not completed. At this stage, in the event, the bail is granted, there is chances of tampering and terrorizing the witnesses and he may remain absconding and not available for the 7 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 investigation and trial. He may indulge in similar offences. Hence, prays for rejection of the bail petition.

11. At the out set, the alleged offences are neither

punishable with death penalty nor imprisonment for life. Said offences are triable by Magistrate. The commission of offences by the petitioner is required to be established during trial. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the decision of State of Rajasthan, Jaipur V/s. Balachandh @ Baliay (AIR 1977 SC 2447) and in catena of decisions pleased to laid down the legal doctrine that "Bail is a rule and jail is an exception". This legal doctrine is laid down for safeguarding fundamental right under Article 21 of Constitution of India, granting the right to life and liberty.

12. The offence alleged against the petitioner is

punishable under 420 of I.P.C. and other allied offences. It is settled law that, in a case of this nature, custodial interrogation is not warranted. In the decision reported 8 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 in AIR 2023 Supreme Court 1570: AIR Online 2023 SC 198 in a case of Mahdoom Bava V/s.Central Bureau of Investigation, the Hon'ble Court pleased to observe that; Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) S.438 – Anticipatory bail – Entitlement – Offences U/Ss. 420, 467, 468, 471 R/w.Sec.120B of I.P.C. and S.13(3) R/w.Sec. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act – When case was primarily based on documentary evidence, arrest of accused persons was not warrantedEleven cases were registered against prime accused but those cases were not relevant for adjudicating the present matter. Accused persons apprehended that they may be remanded to custody by trial courtAnticipatory bail granted. The ratio laid down in the cited decision is squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case.

13. Admittedly, there was an agreement between

the complainant and other accused persons. The alleged financial transaction taken place under the agreement in question. This shows that the matter is civil in nature. 9 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 As rightly contended that the complainant is trying to give colour of criminal case. There is no report of criminal antecedents. Therefore, pre trial detention is not warranted. The petitioner has permanent place of abode in Bengaluru. There is remote chances of flee from justice. The apprehension of the prosecution could be met by imposing stringent conditions to secure the accused person during trial. Under these facts and circumstances and having regard to the nature of offences alleged and punishment prescribed and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Satender Kumar Antil V/s.Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2022 Live Law (SC) 577 , I am of the opinion that, to struck the balance between individual liberty and humiliation due to unjustifiable detention against free and fair trial as well as welfare of society, it is proper to enlarge the petitioner 10 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 on bail by imposing appropriate terms and conditions. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered in the Affirmative.

14. POINT NO.2: In view of the aforesaid

discussion, this court proceed to pass the following : O R D E R Anticipatory bail petition U/s.438 of Cr.P.C., filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 is allowed. Respondent police are directed to release the petitioner/accused No.2 on bail in the event of her arrest in Cr.No.165/2023 of Ashokanagar police station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 405, 415, 418, 420, 120, 120-B read with Section 34 of IPC pending on the file of III- Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru by taking personal bond for ₹ .50,000/- (fifty thousand) with two sureties for like sum on following conditions; 11 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024

1. Petitioner/accused No.2 shall appear

before Investigating Officer and cooperate with investigation within 15 days from the date of this order and make himself available for investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

2. He shall furnish documents regarding her address proof, the address proof of

her sureties at the time of furnishing sureties.

3. He shall mark his attendance at respondent police station on 1st and 3rd

Sunday of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m., till conclusion of investigation or for a period of 3 months, whichever is earlier.

4. He 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 her from disclosing such facts either to 12 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 the Investigation Officer or to the trial court.

5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of

India without prior permission of the trial court.

6. He shall not involve in any criminal activities.

7. In the event any change in the residential address, petitioner and his

sureties shall intimate the same to the trial court immediately without fail. Violation of any of these conditions would entitle cancellation of bail. (Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed by her, corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this 6th day of April, 2024). (KALPANA M.S.) LXIV ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, CCH-65, BENGALURU CITY. 13 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 14 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024 Order pronounced in the open Court, vide separate Order:- O R D E R Anticipatory bail petition U/s.438 of Cr.P.C., filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 is allowed. Respondent police are directed to release the petitioner/accused No.2 on bail in the event of her arrest in Cr.No.165/2023 of Ashokanagar police station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 405, 415, 418, 420, 120, 120-B read with Section 34 of IPC pending on the file of III-Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru by taking personal bond for ₹.50,000/- (fifty thousand) with two sureties for like sum on following conditions;

1. Petitioner/accused No.2 shall appear before Investigating Officer and 15 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024

co-operate with investigation within 15 days from the date of this order and make himself available for investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

2. He shall furnish documents regarding her address proof, the

address proof of her sureties at the time of furnishing sureties.

3. He shall mark his attendance at respondent police station

on 1st and 3rd Sunday of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m., till conclusion of investigation or for a period of 3 months, whichever is earlier.

4. He 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 her from disclosing such facts either to the Investigation Officer or to the trial court. 16 Crl.Misc.No.2977/2024

5. He shall not leave the

jurisdiction of India without prior permission of the trial court.

6. He shall not involve in any criminal activities.

7. In the event any change in the residential address, petitioner and

his sureties shall intimate the same to the trial court immediately without fail. Violation of any of these conditions would entitle cancellation of bail. LXIV ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, CCH-65, BENGALURU CITY.