Karnataka High Court
Madhu Sudhana Rao vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 September, 2017
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101951 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
MADHU SUDHANA RAO, S/O SIVARAMAIH,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATIC,
M/S PUPIL TREE P.U.COLLEGE,
5TH KMS MILE STONE,
THALLAM ROAD, SREEDHARAGADDA POST,
BALLARI TALUK AND DISTRICT-583101.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.Y.LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
(THROUGH POLICE INSPECTOR,
RURAL POLICE STATION, BALLARI DISTRICT)
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE SEEKING TO GRANT BAIL TO
THE PETITIONER / ACCUSED IN CRIME NO.93 OF 2017 OF
RURAL POLICE STATION, BALLARI OFFENCES UNDER SECTION
406, 420 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860 ON THE FILE OF III
ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BALLARI.
:2:
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent Police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest of the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.93/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case, one Sanjappa who is the Lecturer and Principal of Chaitanya P.U.College,Ballari, lodged the complaint alleging that accused was working as Mathematics Lecturer and he was delegated to take care the boys hostel of the said college and petitioner was given authority to collect academic fees and the hostel fees of the students. On 31.03.2017, when the said complainant examined the accounts it was found that PUC-I and II year students i.e. totally 8 students :3: whose names are named in the complaint had paid fees and on enquiry with aforesaid students it has come to the knowledge of the complainant, that petitioner had asked students to transfer the fees to his personal account the details of which are also furnished in the complaint, the total amount amounting to Rs.2,85,500/-. The said amount is credited into the petitioner's personal account and when the complainant questioned the petitioner regarding the said transactions, the petitioner said to have stated that he would return the amount and that he would give the resignation to the said college and he would join elsewhere and on 1.4.2017 the said petitioner said to have given resignation letter. The said matter was informed to Smt.Radhika who is the secretary of the Chaitanya College. She said to have informed the complainant that the petitioner has taken advance salary of Rs.15,04,400/- and returned Rs.10,69,246/- and the balance amount of Rs.4,35,194/- was due from the petitioner. The petitioner taken advance on the condition that he would work in the college and he would repay the loan amount. The :4: petitioner siphoned the amount of Rs.4,35,149/- pertaining to the loan amount and the amount of Rs.2,85,550/- fees pertaining to the students hostel and college fees. Hence totally he is in due to the tune of Rs.7,20,695/-. He misused the said amount pertaining to the institution with an intention to put the institute under loss. Hence the complainant sought to take appropriate action against the petitioner herein. On the basis of the same, a case came to be registered against the present petitioner for the said offence.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused so also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submission that because of the convenience of the students when the present petitioner was authorized to collect the hostel fees and also the college fees. Accordingly the petitioner collected and it is the students who directly credited the amount to the personal account :5: of the petitioner herein and it is not the petitioner who credited the amount into his account. Hence the learned counsel made submission that a false complaint has been filed only to threaten the present petitioner to leave the college by tendering resignation. Hence the learned counsel submitted, he is ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by the Court. Hence he may be admitted to anticipatory bail.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader made submission that looking to the allegations in the complaint, he has not repaid the loan amount to the tune of Rs.4,35,194/-. Apart from that even the amount that he has collected from the students both college fees and as well as the hostel fees and totally he is in due to the tune of Rs.7,20,695/-. Learned High Court Government Pleader made submission that he cheated the institution by crediting the amount into his personal account and thereby he has committed the offence, so he is not entitled to be granted with bail.
:6:
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR and complaint and also the order of the learned Sessions Judge, rejecting the bail application of the present petitioner. Even perusing the order of the learned Sessions Judge, it is held that the present petitioner cheated the said institution because of the monetary gain. Looking to the grounds urged in the bail petition, it is contended by the petitioner that he is innocent and a false complaint has been lodged against him. It is the students who directly credited the amount into his account and he has not collected the amount from the students, then crediting into his personal account. Hence he contended that he has not committed any such offence and he is ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by the Court. The alleged offence punishable under Section 406 and 420 of IPC are also triable by the Magistrate Court and they are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence by imposing reasonable conditions, the petitioner can be admitted to anticipatory bail.
:7:
7. Accordingly the petition is allowed. The respondent police are directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offence in Crime No.93/2017 of Rural Police Station, Ballari, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner has to execute personal bond for a sum of 1,00,000/- and furnish one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner has to make himself available before the IO for interrogation, as and when called for.
iv. Petitioner has to appear before the
concerned Court within 30 days from the
date of this order and to execute the
personal bond and the surety bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RHR/MRK/-