Karnataka High Court
Sri Ashok Kumar G vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 January, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KAR 153
Author: John Michael Cunha
Bench: John Michael Cunha
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.167 OF 2020
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.168 OF 2020
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.152 OF 2020
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100 OF 2020
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.166 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
SRI ASHOK KUMAR G
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
S/O SRI GOPALAPPA.K
R/AT NO.26
KOTHAGONDAPALLI
HOSUR TALUK
KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT
TAMILNADU-635001. ...PETITIONER
(COMMON)
(BY SRI: CHANNAKRISHNAPPA N, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CID POLICE
EARLIER MALUR POLICE
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE-560001. ...RESPONDENT
(COMMON)
(BY SRI: THEJESH.P., HCGP)
2
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.167 OF 2020
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.306/2017 OF MALUR POLICE STATION, KOLAR FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 403, 477A, 420 R/W
34 AND 36 OF IPC, SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF PRIZE CHITS AND
MONEY CIRCULATION SCHEME (BANNING) ACT AND SECTION 9
OF KPID ACT.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.168 OF 2020
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.306/2017 OF MALUR POLICE STATION, KOLAR FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 403, 477A, 420 R/W
34 AND 36 OF IPC, SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF PRIZE CHITS AND
MONEY CIRCULATION SCHEME (BANNING) ACT AND SECTION 9
OF KPID ACT.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.152 OF 2020
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.306/2017 (S.C.NO.211/2019) REGISTERED BY MALUR
POLICE STATION, KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 403, 477A, 420 R/W 34 AND 36 OF IPC, AND
SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF PRIZE CHITS AND MONEY CIRCULATION
SCHEME (BANNING) ACT AND SECTION 9 OF KPID ACT.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100 OF 2020
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.306/2017 OF MALUR POLICE STATION, KOLAR FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 403, 477A, 420 R/W
34 AND 36 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF PRIZE CHITS
AND MONEY CIRCULATION SCHEME (BANNING) ACT AND
SECTION 9 OF KPID ACT.
3
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.166 OF 2020
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.306/2017 (S.C.NO.211/2019) REGISTERED BY MALUR
POLICE STATION, KOLAR FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 403, 477A, 420 R/W 34 AND 36 OF IPC, AND
SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF PRIZE CHITS AND MONEY CIRCULATION
SCHEME (BANNING) ACT AND SECTION 9 OF KPID ACT.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP. Learned HCGP has not filed any statement of objections, but has orally opposed the petitions.
2. In all these five petitions, petitioner herein is arrayed as accused No.3 in the charge sheet submitted by CID police under sections 403, 477(A), 420 r/w 34 and 36 of IPC and sections 4 and 5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme(Banning) Act, 1978 and section 9 of The Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Institutions Act, 2004( for short 'KPID Act').
4
3. The case of the prosecution is that accused No.2 Sri. Manjunath G formed a company by name M/s. Agri Sankalpa Farm Estates India Private Limited, Kolar and registered the same under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner herein was inducted as one of the Directors of the said company in the year 2011. During the period 2009-2016, the company run by accused Nos.1 to 3 collected a total amount of Rs.14,04,35,363/- from 15409 depositors without permission of the Reserve Bank of India and over the years returned an amount of Rs.8,91,83,793/- to 9381 depositors and they owed a sum of Rs.5,12,51,580/- to 6028 depositors.
4. FIR was registered against the company at the instance of the depositors. Investigation was entrusted to CID, Bengaluru. In the course of investigation, it transpired that the amounts received from the depositors were invested in the name of Gopalappa K. father of accused No.2, Anjinappa and one Munivenkatappa towards the purchase of various properties in Krishnagiri District of Tamil Nadu. It is further alleged that various cheques issued by the company towards refund of the 5 deposits were dishonoured and hence charge sheet has been laid against accused Nos.1 to 5 for the above offences.
5. Accused No.5 was arrayed as one of the accused in his capacity as a Store Executive working in accused No.1 company at the relevant time. He has been admitted to bail by orders of this Court in Crl.P.No.7593/2019 dated 07.11.2019 on the ground that he was merely working as a Store Executive on a salary of Rs.9,212/- and there was no material to show that he was also a beneficiary of the deposits. The petitioner/accused No.3 appears to have been implicated in the alleged offences mainly on the ground that he was one of the Directors of accused No.1 company. The material collected by the Investigating agency goes to show that all transactions of the company were carried on by accused No.2 in his capacity as the Managing Director of the company.
6. Learned HCGP concedes the position that all the deposit receipts were signed and issued by accused No.2 in his capacity as the Managing Director of the company making it evident that accused No.2 was in-charge of all the affairs of the 6 company and the petitioner herein was only a nominal Director of the said company. Of-course knowledge of acts of the company could be attributed to the petitioner as he was one of the Directors of the said company for a long period of five years and during the said period, the aforesaid transactions had taken place; nonetheless, having regard to the allegations made in the complaint that all the deposits collected by the company have been invested in the properties purchased in the name of father of accused No.2, Anjinappa and one Munivenkatappa, said properties could be liquidated to recover the amount collected from the depositors. In that view of the matter, the release of the petitioner on bail would not in any way affect the case of the prosecution.
7. The only consideration at this juncture is to secure the presence of the petitioner for the purpose of trial. Hence, to safe-guard the interest of the prosecution and to ensure that the petitioner does not flee from justice during trial, it is necessary to impose stringent conditions while enlarging the petitioner on bail.
7
Accordingly, the criminal petitions are allowed.
a) In all the above five cases, petitioner/accused No.3 is ordered to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond in a sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs (Rupees Ten Lakh only) in each case with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
b) He shall appear before the court on every date of hearing unless exempted by orders of the trial court.
c) He shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses in whatsoever manner.
d) He shall deposit his passport or documents of the properties owned by him in the trial court.
If he does not own any property, he shall swear to an affidavit that he does not own any such properties or passport in his name. The trial court shall ensure that the title deeds of the sureties are deposited with the trial court while enlarging the petitioner on bail.
e) He shall not get involved in similar offences.
Sd/-
JUDGE *mn/-