Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Kodi Veera Venkata Satyanarayana vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 29 November, 2023

        THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO

              CRIMINAL PETITION No.7374 of 2023
O R D E R:

1. The Criminal Petition, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), is filed on behalf of the petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.4 to grant anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.158 of 2023 of Kakinada II Town Law and Order Police Station, Kakinada, East Godavari District.

2. The above crime was registered against the petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.4 and others for the offences punishable under Section 120-B, 420, 406, 408, 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'IPC') and Section 5 of Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999 (for short, 'APPDFE Act').

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that based on the report of Divisional Cooperative Officer, Kakinada, dated 02.07.2023, the present crime was registered for the above-said offences against A.1 to A.4 and 10 others, with an allegation that the Karthikeya Cooperative Building Society Limited, at Kakinada, having collected deposits from the depositors, failed to repay the same and basing on the report of four depositors, Divisional Cooperative Officer, Kakinada, instructed the Assistant Registrar-I, Kakinada to conduct a preliminary enquiry, and in turn, he has conducted a preliminary enquiry. One other enquiry officer 2 also conducted the enquiry and collected material, and as per their information, A.1 has served as President of the said Society, committed misappropriation of funds of crores of rupees, failed to repay the amount to the depositors, joined his family members as members of the said Society. Further, they sanctioned fictitious loans for Rs.24,68,230/- during the period from 10.03.2003 to 09.03.2008, an amount of Rs.1,65,42,687/- during the period from 28.03.2008 to 17.02.2013, an amount of Rs.2,78,50,062/- for the period from 24.02.2013 to 23.02.2018, an amount of Rs.67,86,324/- for the period from 18.03.2018 to 17.03.2023 and staff of the Society also improperly closed certain loans, in the loan ledger, by falsely indicating them as collection, even though, they were not recorded in the cash book at the instance of Accountant K. Kanaka Mahalakshmi. All the accused misappropriated an amount of Rs.21,58,06,974/- of the innocent public.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.4 submit that A.1 gave loans to the public more than the alleged misappropriation of funds; the Society of A.1 also has movable and immovable properties worth crores of rupees, based on the complaint made by defacto complainant, an enquiry under Section 51 of Cooperative Societies Act was conducted, but it is not alleged that Section 51 enquiry report discloses that the deposits were not returned which is the essential 3 ingredient to attract Section 5 of APPDFE Act; the petitioners apprehending harassment and torture in the hands of the police if they are arrested as they would adopt third-degree methods; the petitioners 2 and 3 are nothing to do with the day to day affairs of the Society. He further submits that A.1 underwent Heart bypass surgery, suffering from other ailments, and was bedridden; the offences alleged are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed granting bail to the petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.4.

6. I have heard both sides.

7. I perused the entire material on record.

8. As seen from the record, based on the report of Divisional Cooperative Officer Kakinada, dated 02.07.2023, a case in Crime No.158 of 2023 was registered against A.1 to A.4 and 10 others. The 1st petitioner is A.1; the petitioners 2 and 3 are A.2 and A.4, who are the wife and son of A.1. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that A.2 and A.4 are roped in this crime as accused because of their relationship with A.1 and even according to the report submitted to the District Cooperative Officer, Kakinada District, after the Section 51 of the enquiry by the Assistant Registrar No.5, Kakinada, no accusations have been made against the petitioners 2 and 3/A.2 and A.4. 4

9. After carefully perusing the report, it reflects several financial irregularities said to have been committed by A.1 herein. Hence, this Court finds force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners 2 and 3/A.2 and A.4 were roped as accused because of their relationship with A.1. It is not in dispute that the petitioners 2 and 3/A.2 and A.4 are said to be members of the Society. No material is placed suggesting that members have had any role in the commission of the offence. The President and the Manager of the Society deal with the affairs of the Society.

10. Considering the material on record, this Court finds it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners/A.2 and A.4 with certain conditions.

i) The petitioners/A.2 and A.4 are directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, II Town L&O Police Station, Kakinada, within two (2) weeks from today and on such surrender, the petitioners/A.2 and A.4 shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to his satisfaction.
ii) The petitioners/A.2 and A.4 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required, and they shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioners/A.2 and A.4 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned on every alternative day between 10.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. for two months or till the filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier.
5

11. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition concerning the petitioners/A.2 and A.4 is allowed. However, the petition against the petitioner/A.1 is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file a fresh application in the circumstances of the case.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO Date:29.11.2023 MS 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7374 of 2023 Dated:29.11.2023 MS