Karnataka High Court
Dr Harish vs Stae By Banaswadi Police Station on 30 June, 2016
Author: K.N.Phaneendra
Bench: K.N.Phaneendra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3885 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
DR. HARISH
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
S/O THANGARAJ
5TH MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS
KEB ROAD, NEAR KULLAPPA CIRCLE
KAMMANAHALLI
BANGALORE - 560 084.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.MUNISWAMY GOWDA S.G., FOR
M/S. PRAMILA ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATES)
AND:
STATE BY BANASWADI
POLICE STATION
BANASWADI, BANGALORE - 560 043
THROUGH S.P.P.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. S. VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP)
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.220/2016 OF
BANASWADI P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
506, 504, 420 R/W 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
A person by name Sri C.Elumalai lodged a First Information Report on 27.4.2016 alleging offences under Sections 420, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC and a crime is registered in Crime No.220/2016.
2. The brief allegations made against the accused persons are that, the complainant is a permanent resident of Bengaluru City and he tried to get a medical seat to his son Mr.Balaji in a private medical college. At that time, the accused No.1 called the complainant on 23.1.2014 and informed him to go and meet directly in the Bangalore office, so that he can arrange for a medical seat with lower package. Accordingly, the complainant appears to have met the said person in his office and accused No.1 and the petitioner are said to be the co-partners for arranging the management seats and they asked the complainant to pay an amount of Rs.45 lakhs (full package fees of MBBS). On such promise, it is said 3 that, complainant has paid an amount of Rs.19 lakhs to accused No.1 and Rs.5.5 lakhs to accused No.3 and agreed to pay the remaining Rs.20 lakhs after getting the confirmation of medical seat.
3. It appears, the complainant could not be able to secure the medical seat to his son. He appears to have demanded the money from the accused persons. In this context, it is said that, accused No.1 issued three cheques and this petitioner has issued one cheque for a sum of Rs.7.5 lakhs and those cheques were dishonoured by the bank on presentation. Therefore, it appears that, on those allegation a complaint came to be lodged against the accused persons who have cheated the complainant.
4. A plain reading of the complaint reveals that, no amount of money has been given to this petitioner. It is only the allegation that the complainant has paid the amount to accused Nos.1 and 3. During the course of trial it has to be established that this petitioner in what manner was also involved in 4 extracting the money from the complainant. That has to be proved during the course of trial. Looking to the allegations made and the offences are not being punishable either with death or imprisonment for life and further there is no money which has been paid to the petitioner herein, though there is an allegation that he has given a cheque for Rs.7.5 lakhs, the same has to be examined during the course of trial. In the above said circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of Anticipatory Bail. Hence, the following :
:ORDER:
The petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.220/2016 of Respondent-Banaswadi Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC, on the following conditions:5
i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the I.O. within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute his personal bonds for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety for the likesum the to the satisfaction of the I.O.
or jurisdictional Court as the case may be.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall appear before the I.O. as and when required for the purpose of investigation.
iv) The petitioner shall appear before the court on all future hearing dates unless exempted for any valid reasons by the trial court.
v) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission by the trial court till the disposal of the case registered against him.
vi) The petitioner shall mark his
attendance in the respondent police
6
station on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till the completion of investigation or for a period of two months.
Sd/-
JUDGE ap*