Karnataka High Court
Akshay Alias Ramesh S/O Susheelendra vs State Of Karnataka on 8 December, 2021
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8 t h DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102269/2021
BETWEEN:
AKSHAY @ RAMES H S/O SUSHEELEN DRA
AGE 30 YEARS , OCC. DRIVER,
R/O A GRAHARA VI LLAGE,
HARAPANAHALLI T ALUKA,
DISTRICT VIJAYNAGAR
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRINIVA S B. NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROS ECUT OR,
HIGH COURT OF K ARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH,
THROUGH HIREHA DAGAL POLICE ST ATION
DISTRICT VIJAYNAGAR
... RES PONDENT
(BY SRI. RAMESH B.CHI GARI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF
CR.P.C., SEEKIN G TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO THE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IN CRIME NO.134/ 2021 OF
HIREHADAGAL POLICE STATION REGISTERED FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHA BLE U/S 420 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
Accused No.1 has filed this appeal under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking bail in Crime No.134/2021 of Hirehadagal Police Station registered for an offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of The Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity).
2. It is the case of the prosecution that, one Prabhu has filed complaint on 23.08.2021 against accused No.1 and other unknown accused. In the said complaint it is stated that, about 7 years ago complainant came in contact with accused No.1 and accused No.1 has introduced himself as a businessman dealing in vegetables. The accused No.1 and 3 complainant carried business for about 06 months during which time accused No.1 has obtained the mobile number of complainant. In the first week of July 2021 the petitioner/accused No.1 has called the complainant over phone and informed that he was in difficulty and requested the assistance of complainant, the complainant agreed to help accused No.1. It is further stated by accused No.1 that his master is having 2 KG of gold and he wanted to sell it in much cheaper price than the market price. On 18.07.2021, the complainant along with others came near temple situated by the side of Tungabhandra river in Mylar village and the complainant was made to believe by giving him 3 original gold coins to ascertaining the purity of the gold, the complainant having been confirmed with the 4 purity, agreed to purchase the gold. The complainant arranged Rs.5.00 lakhs and informed accused No.1 that he was ready with the cash, thereafter, on 22.07.2021 at 9.00 AM complainant along with his relatives had been near Mylara village, at that time accused No.1 and others came on motor bike and handed over gold coins and took Rs.5.00 lakhs cash and went away. Subsequently, when the complainant got tested the said gold coins it was found to be fake gold coins and the said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.134/2021 of Hirehadagal Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of IPC against accused No.1 and 3 unknown person. During the investigation, the petitioner came to be arrested on 08.09.2021 and remanded to 5 judicial custody. The petitioner/accused No.1 filed bail application in Crl.Misc.No.5497/2021 seeking bail and the same came to be rejected by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, sitting at Hosapete by order dated 12.11.2021. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking bail.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. It would be the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent, has not committed any offence as alleged and he has been falsely implicated in the case. It is his further submission that, the incident has taken place on 22.07.2021 and the complaint has been 6 filed on 23.08.2021 and there is delay of more than one month in filing the complaint. It is his further submission that cash of Rs.50,000/- has been recovered from accused Nos.3 and 4, cash of Rs.2,00,000/- has been recovered from the doom of the bike of accused No.2, cash of Rs.40,000/- out of Rs.2,00,000/- has been recovered from accused No.1. With this, he prayed for allowing the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader contended that the complainant is the resident of Halalu village, Hadagali taluk and he has given explanation for the delay in filing the complaint. It is his further submission that, out of Rs.5,00,000/-, Rs.3,40,000/- has been recovered. The offence alleged against the petitioner and other accused are serious offence. Investigation is 7 still in progress. If the petitioner is granted bail, at this stage, he will hamper the investigation and tamper the prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.
6. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the complaint, FIR and other documents.
7. The accusation levelled against the petitioner/accused No.1 is that he along with accused Nos.2 to 4 cheated the complainant by giving him fake gold coins and taking cash of Rs.5,00,000/- which has been shared among accused Nos.1 to 4. Accused Nos.1 and 2 got their share of Rs.2,00,000/- each and accused Nos.3 and 4 got their share of Rs.50,000/- 8 each. Out of Rs.2,00,000/- of the share of accused No.1, an amount of Rs.40,000/- has been recovered at his instance from his house and Rs.50,000/- each has been recovered at the instance of accused Nos.3 and 4. Rs.2,00,000/- (share of accused No.2) has been recovered which was kept in the doom of his bike. Major portion of the amount cheated has been recovered. Whether the petitioner and other accused cheated the complainant is a matter of investigation and trail after filing of final report. It is submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the police in the investigation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. The main objection of the prosecution is that, if the petitioner is granted bail, he will hamper the investigation and tamper the prosecution 9 witnesses and flee from justice. The said objection can be met with by imposing stringent conditions.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for granting bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in Crime No.134/2021 of Hirehadagal Police Station subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) 10 with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall co-
operate with the police in the
investigation.
iv) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall
remain present before the police
station concerned on every Sunday between 10:00am to 2:00pm and mark his attendance for a period of two months or till filing of the final report, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE kmv