Karnataka High Court
Avinash. B vs State By Kodigehalli P. S on 10 June, 2022
Author: H.P. Sandesh
Bench: H.P. Sandesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4168/2022
BETWEEN:
AVINASH B.,
S/O BABU PRASAD,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT NO.14,
CHUNCHAGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
SHARADANAGAR,
NEAR LAKE, ANJANAPURA,
BENGALURU-560 062.
AND ALSO
RESIDING AT NO.1,
SEETHA BYRAVESHWARANILAYA,
8TH CROSS, R.M.V. 2ND STREET,
KANNURAMMA TEMPLE, DEVINAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 094. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI M.PARTHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY
KODIGEHALLI P. S.,
BENGALURU-560 092,
REPRESENTED BY HCGP,
BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.K.KRISHNA KUMAR, HCGP)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.63/2022 OF KODIGEHALLI
P.S.,BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss.417, 420,
384 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE VII
ADDITIONAL ACMM, AT BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner/accused on bail in the event of his arrest in respect of Crime No.63/2022 registered by Kodigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 384 read with 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing 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 complainant is working in Zomato, she came in contact with this petitioner when she attended accused No.2's birthday and thereafter having acquaintance with the petitioner and he used to talk to her freely. That on 07.12.2021, he met her in 3 Forum Mall, expressed that his wife is troubling him, if she gets some money, she will give divorce to him and he will going to marry the complainant and had sexual relationship. He has taken the nude photographs and blackmailing her and she gave an amount of Rs.2 Lakhs and also collected money from her friends gave an amount of Rs.1.5 Lakhs. Hence, lodged a complaint against the petitioner and a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 384 read with 34 of IPC.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that a false allegation is made against the petitioner herein and prior to that one more complaint was given before the Koramangala Police on 05.03.2022, wherein, she has alleged the dispute with regard to the money transaction between both of them. An allegation was made that the amount was not repaid. The Police have not registered a case and given the NCR. The learned counsel also would submit that the petitioner himself made several payments in favour of the complainant and produced the bank statement. The learned 4 counsel would submit that the present complaint filed is an after thought making other allegations. Hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State would submit that the serious allegations are made in the complaint. Hence, the presence of the petitioner is required.
6. Having heard the respective counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, particularly, prior to lodging of this complaint, a complaint was given to Koramangala Police on 05.03.2022, wherein, an allegation is made with regard to cheating and she is in back of Rs.8 Lakhs, which she has paid and the present complaint is filed on 18.03.2022 subsequent to the earlier complaint and the said complaint is also sent through post and not personally went and lodged the complaint. Having taken note of the contents of the first complaint and the second complaint, no doubt, in the second complaint, the serious allegations are made and the same has not been narrated in the complaint given just 12 days prior to this complaint. Hence, it is 5 appropriate to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., subject to the condition that he has to appear before the Investigating Officer to assist him for investigation.
7. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.63/2022 registered by Kodigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 384 read with 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.6
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction without prior permission of the Investigating Officer till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months, whichever is earlier.
(v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., on 30th of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., before the Investigating Officer for a period of three months or till the charge-sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE cp*