Karnataka High Court
Manjunath S/O Jatteppa Ginni vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 September, 2016
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.201069/2016
Between
Manjunath
S/o Jatteppa Ginni
Age: 20 years
Occ: Student
R/o Hirerugi Tq. Indi
Dist. Vijayapur
... Petitioner
(By Sri Shivanand V. Pattanashetti, Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka
R/by Addl. SPP Kalaburagi Bench
(Through Indi P.S. Dist. Vijayapur)
...Respondent
(By Sri Sheshadri Jaishankar M. HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to grant
the anticipatory bail to the petitioner and direct the Indi
Police Station to release the petitioner on bail in the
event of his arrest in Indi P.S. FIR (Crime) No.258/16
pending on the file of the JMFC Court at Indi which is
registered for the offences punishable under Section 420
2
of IPC and UIDAI OM No.(4)/57/19/QAP/2015-E&U-
VOI-3.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the
Court made the following:
ORDER
This is the petition filed by the petitioner/accused under section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking direction to the Respondent police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest of the petitioner for the alleged offence under section 420 of IPC and UIDAI OM No.(4)/57/19/QAP/2015-E&U-VOI-3 registered in Respondent police station crime number 258/2016.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the complainant Raghavendra working as the Assistant Manager in Ankit Company Ltd., Bengaluru and he was working from last five years in the said Company. The Anikt Company is carrying out the Government schemes regarding issuing of PAN card, Adhaar card, NPS, TDS, Insurance booking and Trading. In the said Ankit Company, for preparing the Adhaar card, the operators have been appointed by giving them 3 the Company's login ID and likewise for Indi taluka, Vijayapura, the petitioner was appointed as operator and he was given Rs.15/- for preparation of each Adhaar card and used ID of the petitioner is ALNSDL 1219, Certificate No.N0018071. The said Adhaar scheme is the scheme of the Central Government and for preparing Adhaar card of a person, such any persons should personally come to the Adhaar Centre and his photograph has to be taken on the basis of biometrics system and further the ratina and fingerprints through demographic data has also to be obtained and for obtaining those details there is also a software. The said scheme of Adhaar is evolved to avoid duplicate identification cards. The petitioner instead of taking photograph of a person, he has used the photograph of a person and prepared the Adhaar card bearing No. EID No. 1325/11857/00700/18/07/2016 and the time is mentioned as 10.39.25 as per the data available in the software which is contrary to the Adhaar scheme and as such the petitioner has violated the conditions and thereby he has committed cheating.
4
3. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition and also the complaint and FIR, so also the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge at Vijayapur rejecting the bail petition of the petitioner. Looking to the allegations made in the complaint, they are serious in nature and in my opinion the petitioner is required for custodial interrogation and it is not the case for anticipatory bail at this stage. Accordingly the petition is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE *MK