Karnataka High Court
M/S Agri Sankalp Farma Estate India Pvt ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 October, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KAR 2667
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5119/2020
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5120/2020,
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5121/2020,
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5123/2020,
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5136/2020.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.5119/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. M/s. Agri Sankalp Farma Estate India
Pvt. Ltd., Company,
Office at S.T.B. Complex,
1st Floor, Gandhi Circle
Near Sri Rama Temple, Anekal,
Represented by its Proprietor/Director
Sri Manjunath G.
2. Sri Manjunath G.,
S/o Gopalappa
Aged about 40 years
R/at No.26, Kothagondapalli
Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District
Tamilnadu-635 001.
...Petitioners
(By Sri N.Channakrishnappa, Advocate)
-2-
AND:
The State of Karnataka
by CID Police, Earlier Malur Police,
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Benglauru-560 001
...Respondent
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime
No.306/2017 (S.C.No.208/2019) of Malur Police Station,
Kolar, for the offences punishable under Sections 403,
477A and 420 r/w Sections 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.5120/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. M/s. Agri Sankalp Farma Estate India
Pvt. Ltd., Company,
Office at S.T.B. Complex,
1st Floor, Gandhi Circle
Near Sri Rama Temple, Anekal,
Represented by its Proprietor/Director
Sri Manjunath G.,
2. Sri Manjunath G.,
S/o Gopalappa
Aged about 40 years
R/at No.26, Kothagondapalli
Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District
Tamilnadu-635 001.
...Petitioners
(By Sri N.Channakrishnappa, Advocate)
-3-
AND:
The State of Karnataka
by CID Police, Earlier Malur Police,
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Benglauru-560 001
...Respondent
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime
No.306/2017 (S.C.No.210/2019) of Malur Police Station,
Kolar, for the offences punishable under Sections 403,
477A and 420 r/w Sections 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.5121/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. M/s. Agri Sankalp Farma Estate India
Pvt. Ltd., Company,
Office at S.T.B. Complex,
1st Floor, Gandhi Circle
Near Sri Rama Temple, Anekal,
Represented by its Proprietor/Director
Sri Manjunath G.,
2. Sri Manjunath G.,
S/o Gopalappa
Aged about 40 years
R/at No.26, Kothagondapalli
Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District
Tamilnadu-635 001.
...Petitioners
(By Sri N.Channakrishnappa, Advocate)
-4-
AND:
The State of Karnataka
by CID Police, Earlier Malur Police,
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Benglauru-560 001
...Respondent
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime
No.306/2017 (S.C.No.212/2019) of Malur Police Station,
Kolar, for the offences punishable under Sections 403,
477A and 420 r/w Sections 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.5123/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. M/s. Agri Sankalp Farma Estate India
Pvt. Ltd., Company,
Office at S.T.B. Complex,
1st Floor, Gandhi Circle
Near Sri Rama Temple, Anekal,
Represented by its Proprietor/Director
Sri Manjunath G.,
2. Sri Manjunath G.,
S/o Gopalappa
Aged about 40 years
R/at No.26, Kothagondapalli
Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District
Tamilnadu-635 001.
...Petitioners
(By Sri N.Channakrishnappa, Advocate)
-5-
AND:
The State of Karnataka
by CID Police, Earlier Malur Police,
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Benglauru-560 001
...Respondent
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime
No.306/2017 (S.C.No.209/2019) of Malur Police Station,
Kolar, for the offences punishable under Sections 403,
477A and 420 r/w Sections 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.5136/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. M/s. Agri Sankalp Farma Estate India
Pvt. Ltd., Company,
Office at S.T.B. Complex,
1st Floor, Gandhi Circle
Near Sri Rama Temple, Anekal,
Represented by its Proprietor/Director
Sri Manjunath G.,
2. Sri Manjunath G.,
S/o Gopalappa
Aged about 40 years
R/at No.26, Kothagondapalli
Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District
Tamilnadu-635 001.
...Petitioners
(By Sri N.Channakrishnappa, Advocate)
-6-
AND:
The State of Karnataka
by CID Police, Earlier Malur Police,
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Benglauru-560 001
...Respondent
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime
No.306/2017 (S.C.No.211/2019) of Malur Police Station,
Kolar, for the offences punishable under Sections 403,
477A and 420 r/w Sections 34 and 36 of IPC, 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
'through Video Conference', this day, the Court made the
following:-
ORDER
These petitions have been filed by the petitioners- accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to enlarge them on bail in Crime No.306/2017 of Malur Police Station pending on the file of Principal Sessions Judge (Special Court, Kolar, in S.C.Nos.208/2019, 210/2019, 212/2019, 209/2019 and 211/2019), for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 477A, 420 r/w Sections 34 -7- and 36 of IPC and also under Sections 4 and 5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act and Section 9 of KPID Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel Sri.Channakrishnappa N. for the petitioners-accused virtually and the learned High Court Government Pleader Sri.Mahesh Shetty for the respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that accused Nos.1 and 5 being the Chairman and Directors of M/S.Agri Sankalp Farma Estate India Private Company started in the year 2012-13 and collected money from 1550 customers with an assurance that if the customers keep their money in the Company by the accused persons they will give double the amount in a short period, but no amount have been returned to any of the customers and customers have filed the complaint as against the petitioners-accused. On the basis of the complainant, a case has been registered.
-8-
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that because of demonetization and financial crises there was some loss in the business and as such the amount has not been repaid to the customers. It is his further submission that he was not having any intention to cheat the general public. It is his further submission that an amount of Rs.8,91,83,783/- has been paid to 9381 customers on maturity and only the amount to be repaid is Rs.5,12,51,580/-. It is his further submission that the petitioners-accused are ready to give the amount back to the customers. It is his further submission that already investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed. The alleged allegations have to be meted out only in full fledge trial and it may take some time. It is his further submission that accused Nos.1 and 2 have maintained the details of the receipts and payments of the amount in software and Company has also maintained yearly accounts and the same have been filed in the return to the Income Tax returns. The said documents are -9- available. It is his further submission that the petitioners- accused have not having any intention to cheat the alleged general public. It is his further submission that the petitioners-accused are no more required for the purpose of further investigation and they are ready to co-operate during the trial. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is his further submission that the petitioners-accused have not committed any offence. It is his further submission that the additional charge sheet has also not been filed under Section 173(a) of Cr.P.C. so as to trace new material. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petitions and to release the petitioners-accused on bail.
5. Per contra, it is the submission of the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioners-accused have been involved in Economic Offences. They constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. It is his further submission that if the petitioners-accused are released on bail, they
- 10 -
may abscond and may not be available for the purpose of trial and even the KPID Act has been invoked and some more properties are to be seized for the purpose of repayment of all the dues to the general public. It is the serious threat to the financial health and affect the economy of the Country. On these grounds he prayed to dismiss the petitions.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. Though it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners-accused that accused Nos.3 and 6 have been released on bail, they are not the main accused persons in the alleged crime. One is working as a store keeper and another one is also working as a Store Executive and in that light, the Co-ordinate Bench has released them on bail. It is well settled proposition of law by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Y.S.Jagan Mohan
- 11 -
Reddy Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in AIR 2013 SC 1933 that the economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country. This has been observed in paragraphs 15 and 16 of the said decision which reads as under:
"15. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offence having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country.
16. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations,
- 12 -
the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations."
8. On close reading of the contents of the charge sheet material and on perusal of the records it indicates that the petitioners-accused by constituting a Company under the name and style of M/S.Agri Sankalp Farma Estate India Pvt. Ltd. Company and collected the money from 1550 customers by assuring them if they deposit their money in the Company they will give double the amount in a short period and the same has not been returned to the customers and thereby the money has been cheated. It is accused Nos.1 and 2 are the main Directors who have involved in the alleged crime. Under the said facts and
- 13 -
circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that there are no grounds made out by the petitioners-accused as to how they are going to repay the amount to the remaining 6028 depositors to the tune of Rs.5,12,51,580/-. If the petitioners-accused are released on bail, they may abscond and may not be available for the trial.
9. Under the said facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that no prima facie case has been made out so as to release the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail. In that light, the petitions are liable to be dismissed and accordingly they are dismissed.
The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Liberty has been given to the petitioners-accused to file a fresh application in the event if any additional charge sheet is filed.
Sd/-
JUDGE *AP/-