Karnataka High Court
Sri Shabeer Ahmed vs State Of Karnataka By on 9 June, 2022
Author: H.P. Sandesh
Bench: H.P. Sandesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4240/2022
BETWEEN:
SRI SHABEER AHMED,
S/O AHMED PASHA,
AGD ABOUT 38 YEARS,
R/O NO.140, 15TH MAIN,
BWSSB ROAD, NEAR SHOBA THEATRE,
BAPUJINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560026. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI LAKSHMIKANTH G., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
HALASUR GATE P.S.K,
(NOW BY SPL. INVESTIGATION TEAM),
REP. BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU-560001. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.7/2021 OF HALASURGATE P.S., BENGALURU CITY FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 255, 256, 257, 258, 259,
260, 420, 473 READ WITH 34 OF IPC NOW PENDING BEFORE THE
HONBLE I ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
IN CC NO.544/2022.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner in Crime No.7/2021 of Halasurgate Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 420, 473 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the Sub-Registrar of Gandhinagar lodged a complaint that some unknown persons were using the office seal and issued the document bearing Sl.Nos.1 to 9 of the office of C.W.1, Sl.Nos.1 to 8 of the office of C.W.4 and Sl.Nos.1 to 5 of the office of C.W.5. Those documents were fake stamp papers and contained fake seal and signatures having denomination of Rs.50/-, Rs.100/- and Rs.200/- and hence caused loss to the State exchequer. This petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.4, from whom stamp papers were seized worth Rs.10,000/- when the raid was conducted on 30.11.2021 along with other accused 3 persons. The case of the prosecution is that PF Nos.147/2021 to 150/2021, 151/2021 to 152/2021, 156/2021 to 161/2021 and 163/2021 fake stamp papers were used for transaction as genuine documents and caused loss to State exchequer. Based on the complaint, investigation was taken up and also a petition is filed before this Court and in terms of the order passed by the Court, SIT is also constituted to probe into the matter and also to file the charge-sheet. Now the investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed against the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against this petitioner is that he indulged in such acts and recovery is only fake stamp papers worth of Rs.10,000/-. The learned counsel submits that the wife of this petitioner, who has been arraigned as accused No.7 in other case is residing along with the petitioner and she was having criminal antecedents, but this petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents. The learned counsel would vehemently contend that there are no criminal antecedents with regard to committing of these types of acts and according to the prosecution, this petitioner is a distributor and not indulged in preparing the fake stamp papers and the said allegation is only 4 against accused No.1 and franking machine was recovered at the instance of accused No.1 and only 23 items of stamps papers are seized at the instance of the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that investigation has been completed and the prosecution has cited 102 witnesses and against this petitioner, relying upon the statement of C.W.63 and except that material, no other material is found against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. The learned counsel submits that similarly placed accused are shown as witnesses and some of them have not been arraigned as accused and hence the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State submits that this petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.4 and Rs.10,000/- fake stamp papers are seized at the instance of the petitioner and also seized seal of the City Civil Court and the same was used by this petitioner. The learned counsel submits that accused No.7, who was the wife of this petitioner is no more and she passed away on 20.04.2021 and raid was conducted on 30.11.2021 after lapse of seven months and by that time, this petitioner was having fake stamp papers of Rs.10,000/- and 5 indulged in selling the fake stamp papers and hence it is clear that he had indulged in such acts. The learned counsel submits that the very offence of creation and distribution of fake stamp papers amounts to causing loss to State exchequer and Rs.65 lakhs fake stamp papers were been circulated and they were in custody of this petitioner and other accused persons and hence there is prima facie case against the petitioner herein. The learned counsel submits that this Court has rejected the bail petition of accused No.2 and allegation against accused No.2 was that he was having fake stamp papers of Rs.2,500/- and the same was seized from the house of accused No.2 and the same is also considered after filing of the charge-sheet.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and also on perusal of the material available on record, no doubt, the case has been registered at the first instance based on the complaint of Sub-Registrar of Gandhinagar. The stamp papers of different officers signature were used and those documents are fake documents and the same was used as genuine documents for registration and denomination of fake stamp papers were of Rs.50/-, Rs.100/- 6 and Rs.200/-. The investigating agency also recorded the statement of particular witnesses and conducted the raid and seized fake stamp papers and in the case of this petitioner is concerned, raid was conducted on 30.11.2021 and seized fake stamp papers of Rs.10,000/-. The very contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet is also filed and hence the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. The learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State would contend that right is reserved to file the additional charge-sheet under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. The learned counsel brought to notice of this Court that charge-sheet was filed on 31.12.2021 and there is no question of filing any additional charge-sheet material.
7. Having considered the said submission and also taking note of the seriousness and gravity of the offence, the offences invoked under Sections 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 420, 473 read with 34 of IPC are punishable upto ten years and apart from that, allegation of fraud and printing of fake stamp papers affects the State exchequer. The very contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that allegation against this petitioner is that he is only a distributor and not indulged in any 7 act of producing fake stamp papers and whether he had indulged in printing process or distribution is not the matter, whether fake stamp papers are circulated and made use of the same for registration and other purpose is the question involved with regard to which affects the State exchequer and also economy of the country. When such being the case, this is an offence against the Society at large and also it is an impact on the Society and hence taking note of the seizure of Rs.10,000/- stamp papers, though the learned counsel contend that accused No.7, who was wife of this petitioner was having criminal antecedent, this petitioner is not having criminal antecedents, the same cannot be a ground when recovery is made at the instance of the petitioner and after death of seven months of his wife, the raid was conducted and seized the fake stamp papers. When such being the case, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner.
8. The other contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there are 102 witnesses and it takes time to complete the trial and the same is not a ground when the fake stamp papers worth of Rs.65 lakhs are circulated and the offence is against the Society at large and impact on the Society as well 8 as State exchequer. The Court has to take note of the gravity of the offence and the seriousness of accusation and also take note of the fact that if the accused is enlarged on bail, there are chances of fleeing away from justice as well as tamper with the prosecution witnesses since accusation made against the petitioner is indulging in circulation and distribution of fake stamp papers and hence not a case for exercising the discretion in favour of the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. This Court has also rejected the bail petition of accused No.2 in Crl.P.No.1605/2022 dated 14.03.2022 having seized the stamp paper worth of Rs.2,500/- after filing of charge-sheet and hence there cannot be two yardstick while exercising the discretion.
9. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition is rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE MD