Karnataka High Court
Mr Rajesh P K vs State Of Karnataka By Sho on 18 January, 2023
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
CRL.A No. 80 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 80 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
MR. RAJESH P K
S/O P. V. KUMARAN
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
M/S ASSOCIATE BUILDERS
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM
No.866, 2ND MAIN, MARUTHI NAGAR
KOGILU VILLAGE, YELAHANKA
BANGALORE - 560 064.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHANKARA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO,
HANUMANTHANAGAR POLICE STATION
BANGALORE CITY
REPRESENTED BY S. S. P
Digitally signed by HIGH COURT BUILDING
SANDHYA S
Location: HIGH HIGH COURT, BANGALORE - 560 001.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI S VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.16 OF KARNATAKA
PROTECTION OF INTEREST DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL
ESTABLISHMENT ACT, 2004 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT DATED 07.12.2022 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. No.
10789/2022 BY THE C/c PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE (SPECIAL COURT) (CCH-1), BENGALURU AND ETC.
-2-
CRL.A No. 80 of 2023
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Accused No. 19 has filed this appeal seeking setting aside the order dated 07.12.2022 passed in Crl.Misc. No. 10789/2022 by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru whereunder the anticipatory bail petition filed by this appellant - accused No. 19 in respect of crime No. 288/2022 of Hanumanthanagar Police station registered for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 415, 417, 419, 420, 465, 468, 470, 471, 477A, 149 of IPC, Section 9 of the Karnataka Protection of Interest Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2004 (for short hereinafter referred to as KPID Act) and Section 21 of Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (for short hereinafter referred to as BUDS Act) came to be rejected.
2. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and the learned HCGP for the respondent. -3- CRL.A No. 80 of 2023
3. One Sharanagowda G Patil, Managing Director of Karnataka State Souharda Samyukta Sahakari Limited had filed a complaint stating that the office bearers of New Friends Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Limited, Bengaluru, had released loans without obtaining proper security and cheated the depositors by not repaying the deposited amount by misusing their authority being members of Administrative Board and Chief Executive Director. It is further stated that certain borrowers have not repaid the loans borrowed by them and they have cheated the society. The said complaint came to be registered in crime No. 288/2022 for the aforesaid offences. The appellant who is arraigned as accused No. 19, apprehending his arrest, filed Crl.Misc. No. 10789/2022 seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected by the impugned order which is challenged in the instant appeal.
-4-CRL.A No. 80 of 2023
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the appellant is only a borrower and he has repaid a portion of the loan amount in a sum of Rs.5,50,97,500/- and he has also issued post dated cheques. It is his further submission that the office bearers of the said New Friends Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Limited who were arraigned as accused have been granted anticipatory bail by the Special Court in Crl.Misc. Nos. 10833/2022, 10608/2022, 10511/2022 and 10565/2022. It is his further submission that the offences alleged are not attracted against this appellant who is a borrower. It is his further submission that the appellant is not a financial establishment to attract offence under Section 9 of KPID Act and Section 21 of BUDS Act. It is his further submission that on perusal of the averments of the complaint offence under Section 9 of KPID Act and Section 21 of BUDS Act are not attracted. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail as the bar contained under Section 18 of the Act is not attracted. It is -5- CRL.A No. 80 of 2023 his further submission that appellant - accused No. 19 is ready to cooperate with the Police in the investigation. Without considering the said aspects learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order which requires interference by this Court. With this he prayed to allow the appeal and grant anticipatory bail to the appellant.
5. Per contra learned HCGP would contend that appellant - accused No. 19 has borrowed huge loan amount from the society and he has not repaid the entire loan amount. It is his further submission that there is a prima facie case against the appellant for the offence alleged against him. Considering all these aspects learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order which does not call for interference by this Court. With this he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned High -6- CRL.A No. 80 of 2023 Court Government Pleader this Court has gone through the impugned order, FIR, complaint and other documents.
7. The averments of the complaint reveal that the office bearers who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 12 of New Friends Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Limited have advanced loans without obtaining proper security and the other accused who have availed the loan have not repaid the loan amount and therefore, the society is unable to repay the deposit amount to the depositors. This appellant - accused No. 19 is one of the borrower who has borrowed loan from New Friends Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Limited. It is submitted that the appellant - accused No. 19 had borrowed a sum of Rs.2,30,00,000/- in the year 2017. It is also submitted that he has repaid a sum of Rs.5,50,97,500/- towards repayment of the principal and interest amount. It is his further submission that the appellant is ready to repay the remaining amount with interest. It is also submitted that the appellant - -7- CRL.A No. 80 of 2023 accused No. 19 has issued post dated cheques in favour of the New Friends Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Limited regarding repayment of the loan amount. At this stage it cannot be said that there is a prima facie case against appellant - accused No. 19 who is a borrower for 3the offence under Section 9 of KPID Act and Section 21 of BUDS Act. As there is no prima facie case against him, the appellant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail as the bar contained under Section 18 of the Act is not attracted. Without considering all these aspects learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order which requires interference by this Court.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the learned counsel for the parties, there are valid grounds for setting aside the impugned order and granting anticipatory bail to the appellant subject to terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following; -8- CRL.A No. 80 of 2023
ORDER Appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 07.12.2002 passed in Crl.Misc. No. 10789/2022 by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is set aside. Consequently, the petition filed by the appellant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Consequently, the appellant is granted anticipatory bail and he is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in crime No. 288/2022 of Hanumanthanagar Police Station subject to the following conditions:
i. The appellant - accused No. 19 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. ii. The appellant - accused No. 19 shall voluntarily appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 -9- CRL.A No. 80 of 2023 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and execute bail bond and furnish surety. iii. The appellant - accused No. 19 shall remain present before the Police station concerned on first and third Sunday of every month between 10.00 am to 02.00 pm and mark his attendance for a period of two months or till the filing of the final report whichever is earlier.
iv. The appellant - accused No. 19 shall cooperate with investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required. v. The appellant - accused No. 19 shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer.
- 10 -CRL.A No. 80 of 2023
vi. The appellant - accused No. 19 shall not obstruct or hamper the Police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the Police.
Sd/-
JUDGE LRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15