Karnataka High Court
Prasad M R vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 March, 2022
Author: P.N.Desai
Bench: P.N.Desai
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF, MARCH 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.DESAI
CRL.P.NO.100471 OF 2022
BETWEEN
1. PRASAD M R,
S/O. GOVINDRAO
AGE. 68 OCC. BUSINESS
R/O. KANAIAH RESIDENCY
30, 4TH MAIN ROAD, KHB COLONY
2ND STAGE, BASAVESHWAR NAGAR
DIST. BENGALURU-560079
2. GIRIDHAR
S/O BALAKRISHNA KATHARE,
AGE. 61 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS
R/O. FLAT NO. 16, KCN MANSION
YAMUNABAI ROAD, MADHAV NAGAR
DIST. BENGALURU-560001
3. K. SRINIVAS REDDY
AGE. 53, OCC. BUSINESS
R/O. FLAT 401 KEMAPURAAGRAHARA
COFFEE BOARD LAYOUT,
DIST. BENGALURU-560032
4. VINOD
S/O LATE PUNJILAL SHAH,
AGE. 73 YEARS, OCC. NIL,
C/O LAXMI ROADLINES
70/1, KABUTHAR KHANA DANAPITH KALUPUR
AHMEDABAD-380 002.
5. KRISHNA VALVEKAR,
AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
KAMALA NIWAS,
2
MAVOOR ROAD, TQ: POTTAMAL,
DIST:CALICUT- KERALA STATE
6. VISHNU PATIL
AGE. 56 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. FLAT NO. 306 RATSON ENCLAVE,
BESIDE SAUDATTI HOUSE,
DESHPANDENAGAR, HUBLI-KARNATAKA
7. MOTILAL B KATHARE,
AGE.72 YEARS, OCC. NIL,
R/O. FLAT NO. 202/203
TOWER-A 2ND FLOOR, IVORY ESTATE,
4, SOMESHWARWADI BANER ROAD,
PUNE-411008.
8. POOJA KRISHNA KHODAY
C/O GIRIDHAR B. KATHARE
AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. NIL,
R/O. FLAT NO. 16 KCN MANSION,
YAMUNABAI ROAD, MADHAVANAGAR,
DIST. BENGALURU-560001
9. SRIKRISHNA G KHODAY
AGE. 32 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. FLAT NO. 16 KCN MANSION,
YAMUNABAI ROAD MADHAVANAGAR,
DIST. BENGALURU-560001
10.APEKSHA S PAWAR
AGE. 27 YEARS, OCC. NIL,
C/O MR. GIRIDHAR B.KATHARE,
R/O. FLAT NO. 16 KCN MANSION,
YAMUNABAI ROAD MADHAVANAGAR,
DIST. BENGALURU-560001
11. ANUP G KATHARE
AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
C/O MR. GIRIDHAR B.KATHARE,
R/O. FLAT NO. 16 KCN MANSION,
YAMUNABAI ROAD MADHAVANAGAR,
DIST. BENGALURU-560001
3
12.KRISHNA Y. N.
AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS
2508, 10TH D MAIN RAJAJINGAR
2ND STAGE, BANGALORE CITY-560010.
13.CHANNABASAPPA R H
AGE. 80 YEARS,
OCC. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT,
R/O. NO. 119, 4TH CROSS,
19TH MAIN, 1ST N BLOCK,
RAJAJI NAGAR
DIST. BENGALURU-560010
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.S.S.YADRAMI, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI.RAKESH S.H., ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HUBBALLI TOWN P.S.
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH-580011
....RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.GIRIJA HIREMATH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF
CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND GRANT
ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONERS DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON
BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN HUBBALLI TOWN
P.S. CR.NO.18/2022 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE U/S 120-B, 419, 420, 463, 464, 465, 467, 468,
471, 472 AND 476 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
4
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter for short 'Cr.P.C') by accused Nos.1 to 13 to enlarge them on anticipatory bail in Crime No.18/2022 Hubballi Town police station, registered for offence punishable under Sections 120B, 419, 420, 463, 464, 465, 467, 468,471, 472 and 476 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for short 'IPC').
2. The complainant in the capacity as Secretary of M/s Karnataka Agriculture Foundation, Hubballi has lodged the complaint alleging that these petitioners in collusion with each other have hatched the conspiracy and created the documents by forging the documents, creating fake seals of the society and fabricated the documents. They have also produced antedated false documents before District Registrar, Dharwad by impersonation in order to make wrongful gain and cheat the persons who are really entitled to claim the society. It is also alleged that the petitioners who are the accused are falsely claiming themselves as Chairman, Secretary and members of the Society by 5 creating documents and antedated seals from the year 2005. They have used counterfeit seals of the society and used them for illegal purpose. Hence, the complaint came to be lodged by one Sri. Sridhar B. Kathare S/o Balakrishna Kathare claiming as Secretary of M/s Karnataka Agriculture Foundation. It is alleged that these petitioners have cheated the persons connected with the society. Hence, he lodged complaint to the Inspector of Police, Hubballi town on 14.02.2022. On the basis of said complaint, case in crime No.18/2022 of Hubballi Town Police Station came to be registered for the above said offences.
3. Heard learned senior Counsel Sri.S.S.Yadrami for Sri.Rakesh S.H., advocate for petitioners and Smt.Girija Hiremath, HCGP for respondent-State.
4. Learned senior counsel brought to the notice of this Court that on 18.02.2022, on IA No.1/2022, this Court has granted interim bail to the petitioners who are accused Nos.1 to 13 and matter was listed thereafter. The learned senior Counsel argued that the contents of the complaint 6 are all false, vexatious and only designed to implicate these petitioners and got them arrested as the marriage of accused No.10 with accused no.11 was fixed on 21.02.2022. It is further argued that there is a dispute between complainant, petitioners and accused No.2 and others in respect of management and membership of the society. The society was founded in the year 1974 by the father of the complainant as well as accused No.2 and accused no.7. The complainant has executed illegal Lease Deed for a period of 999 years for a sum of Rs.5,05,000/- which property was worth for more than 50 crores and playing fraud and by illegal acts had committed several offences. Hence, complaint was lodged against him for the offence punishable under Section 420, 408, 409, 465, 468 and 471 r/w 149 of IPC and same is now pending in CC No.4379/2016 before the jurisdictional Court. The accused Nos.1,2,3,4 and 7 have filed suit in OS No.127/2016 in respect of illegal transactions entered into by the complainant and sought relief which is also pending before Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Hubballi. The petitioners have taken the charge of society and got audited the account. 7 The reports and accounts are approved by auditor and there is no question of impersonation or creating any false documents. Accused No.7 Motilalkathare is the eldest brother and accused no.2 Giridhar is the elder brother of the complainant Sridhar. In fact, the complainant filed a writ petitioner before this Court in WP NO.108746/2016 for quashing proceedings filed against him and the same came to be dismissed. It is further argued by learned senior Counsel that according to the complainant, incident took place on 11.08.2021. The complaint is filed on 14.02.2022 which is at the threshold of marriage ceremony to be held on 20/21.02.2022. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. They are permanent residents of their respective address shown in the cause tile and having movable and immovable properties and are ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. With this, he prays to allow the petition.
5. Against this, the learned HCGP argued that there are proceedings pending between the parties. Looking into the gravity of the offence and as it is alleged that the 8 petitioners have used counterfeit seal and forged the documents, these matters are to be investigated and the petitioners are required for interrogation and investigation. Some of the petitioners are residing in different states and also in different cities. If bail petition is allowed, they may abscond and they may not be available for interrogation or for trial. There are chances of tampering the prosecution witnesses. Hence the learned HCGP prays to reject the bail petition.
6. I have perused the bail petition and also the documents filed along with the petition. It appears that there is a dispute between the first informant/complainant and these petitioners in respect of management and membership and affairs of the society i.e., Karnataka Agricultural Foundation. It is also evident that the complainant and petitioners are close relatives and two of the petitioners are own brothers of the complainant. It is also evident that a civil suit is also filed by the petitioners against the complainant and other members of the society and writ petition is also filed by the complainant for 9 quashing the said proceedings which also came to be dismissed. Already there is a criminal case filed by the petitioners against the complainant and the petitioners have urged that the complainant has created the documents and leased the property worth of five crores only for few lakhs, thereby depriving the petitioners and cheated them and he has made unlawful and illegal gain.
7. It is evident that there are both civil and criminal matters pending between them. The nature of allegations are all on the basis of documentary evidence. It is the allegation of fraud, creating counterfeit seal and producing fake documents before the Registrar of Society. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
8. It is settled principle of law that bail is a rule and rejection is an exception. While granting or rejecting the bail application, the Court will have to take into consideration, (1) the nature and seriousness of the offence;
10(2) character of the accused;
(3) circumstances which are peculiar to accused;
(4) reasonable probabilities of presence of the accused not being secured at trial;
(5) reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with; and (6) larger interest of public or the state and similar other considerations, which arise when a court is asked to admit the accused to bail in a non-bailable offence.
9. So keeping in mind these principles, if the records placed before the Court are considered, it is evident that the petitioners have made out grounds to grant anticipatory bail and their contention of arrest by the police is well founded.
10. The apprehension of the prosecution can be meted out by imposing reasonable conditions on the petitioners, as they have undertaken to co-operate with the investigating officer for investigation or interrogation.
11. Therefore looking into the contents of the complaint and the material placed before the Court, in view of the facts and circumstances of this case and the nature of 11 allegations and the pendency of the proceedings between the parties, this petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER
1) The criminal petition filed by the petitioners under section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed.
2) The petitioners/accused nos.1 to 13 are ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.18/2022 of Hubballi Town P.S., pending on the file of JMFC I-Court, Hubballi, registered for the offences punishable under sections 120B, 419, 420, 463, 464, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472, 476 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, on the following conditions.
i) The petitioners/accused shall execute a self bond for Rs.1,00,000/- each with a surety, for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
ii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer for investigation in this case.12
iii) The petitioners shall not try to tamper the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly and they shall not try to tamper any documents connected with this case.
iv) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer within a 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall surrender themselves and thereafter the investigating officer interrogate them and may recover the incriminating articles, if any, and then release them on bail forthwith on the conditions imposed in this order.
v) The petitioners shall furnish proof of their residential correct address along with their mobile phone numbers and shall inform the Court/Investigating Officer if there is any change in the address.
vi) The petitioners shall mark their
attendance before the jurisdictional
Police/SHO on every alternative Sunday between 10.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. for a period of three months or till filing of the charge sheet whichever is earlier.13
vii) The petitioners shall not involve in any criminal activities and shall not commit similar offences of the nature now alleged against them.
viii) The petitioners shall make themselves
available for interrogation by the
investigating officer as and when required.
In case if any of the condition is violated, the prosecution is at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE Hmb- upto para 4 Mrk/- para 5 to end.