Karnataka High Court
Sri K C Veerendra vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 November, 2022
Author: Rajendra Badamikar
Bench: Rajendra Badamikar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11112 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SRI K C VEERENDRA
S/O LATE K CHANNABASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
OCC-BUSINESS
R/A VEERABHADRASWAMY NILAYA
KING STREET OLD TOWN
CHEKKALERE
CHITRADURGA DIST-577522
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. H.S. CHANDRAMOULI, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SMT. KEERTHANA NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE POLICE OF DAVANAGERE EXTN, PS
CHITRADURGA DIST-577522
REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. V.S. HEGDE, SPP-II A/W
SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP-PH)
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.215/2022 OF DAVANAGERE
EXTENTION P.S., DAVANAGERE DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
78(A)(VI) OF THE KARNATAKA POLICE ACT AND SEC.506,420 R/W
34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED II ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND
J.M.F.C., DAVANAGERE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
1. The petitioner-accused No.4 has filed the petition under section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking for anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Davanagere Extension police station in crime No.215/2022 registered for the offences punishable under section 78 (A)(vi) of KP Act and under section 420, 506 read with section 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. V.S.Hegde, learned Special Public Prosecutor-2 for respondent-State. Perused the records.
3. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are that, the complainant-Venkatesh has set law into motion by lodging a complaint which came to be registered in Crime No.215/2022. The allegations made in the complaint discloses that the complainant was persuaded by accused No.1, and as such he began betting in mobile app in order to get money. It is 3 also alleged that he paid Rs.one lakh to accused No.1 who installed cricket betting App, in his mobile and provided necessary user name and password to the complainant. The complainant indulged in betting and he lost Rs. Three Lakhs which was collected by the brother of accused No.1. Even during the world cup match between India and Pakistan, as per advise of the accused No.1, complainant put the bet on Pakistan and he lost Rs.80,000/-. The accused No.1 demanded Rs.80,000/- lost by the complainant and he was also threatened. As such the complainant has lodged the complaint. In the complaint the present petitioner is shown as accused No.4.
4. The petitioner apprehending his arrest had approached the learned Sessions Judge and his bail petition came to be rejected. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.
5. Having heard the arguments and pursuing the records, it is evident that the complainant is involved 4 in betting and he lost more than Rs. 3 lakhs and he was involved in Cricket betting at the instance of accused No.1 and he was persuaded by accused No.1. When complainant lost the amount, then he contacted the accused No.1 and then accused No.1 asked him to come to Goa wherein accused No.1 was staying, to stay along with him asserting that now he is along with present petitioner in Goa and he can bet in casino and earn sufficient amount. The petitioner did not trust him and later on he indulged in betting India-Pakistan match held on 23.10.2022 but he did not succeed and lost Rs.80,000/-. Hence, he has logged the complaint.
6. The allegations in the entire complaint clearly disclose that the present petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.4 has never persuaded the petitioner in anyway in any type of betting. The only allegation against the present petitioner is that the accused No.1 reported him that he was with the present 5 petitioner in a casino and complainant can have a betting there. It is only on the basis of this reference, the present petitioner is implicated as accused No.4 in the instant case.
7. Admittedly, the allegations of the complainant discloses that the complainant has not met accused No.4 at any point of time in person and further he has not transferred any amount nor transacted anything with him. Under these circumstances, merely because the accused No.1 has referred his name in a Phone conversation, it cannot be presumed that the present petitioner is also involved in the alleged offence.
8. Learned SPP would contend that though at this juncture there is no material evidence as against petitioner, the custodial interrogation may be required to ascertain his involvement.
9. If the Investigating agency secures any material evidence, then he is at liberty to approach this Court. 6 At this juncture, there is no material as against the present petitioner to prove his direct involvement. Under these circumstances, I do not find any impediment to admit the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Further the apprehensions raised by the learned SPP can be meted out by imposing certain conditions. Hence, the bail petition needs to be allowed and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
The petitioner/Accused No.4 is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.215/2022 of Davanagere Extension Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under section 78 (A)(vi) of KP Act and under section 420, 506 read with section 34 of IPC which is pending on the file of the Learned II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Davanagere, on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) 7 with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions that,-
i. He shall appear as and when he is directed to appear before the Investigation officer during course of investigation.
ii. He shall surrender before the concerned IO/SHO within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and in the event of surrender, concerned IO/SHO shall release him on bail as directed. iii. He shall not indulge in any of the criminal activities;
iv. He shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly. v. He shall mark his attendance before the Investigating Officer/SHO on 1st and 3rd Saturday of every month till the final report is submitted.
8vi. He shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing unless he is exempted by a specific order.
vii. He shall co-operate for speedy disposal of the matter.
10. In view of the disposal of main petition, pending IA-
1/2022 also stands disposed off, as it does not survive for consideration.
Sd/-
JUDGE SR