Dismissed

Venugopal Vaidya S/O Annayyachar Vaidya v. the State of

Karnataka HC26 Nov 2020CRL.P/101273/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Petitioner sought quashing of an FIR under Section 482 CrPC alleging cheating by a company wherein he had resigned as manager. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that investigation must continue to verify allegations of his continued involvement as a director and fund sharing.

What did the court decide?

Petition for quashing of FIR and stay of proceedings dismissed at the stage of admission.

Venugopal Vaidya S/O Annayyachar Vaidya Vs the State of — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101273/2020

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Venugopal Vaidya S/o. Annayyachar Vaidya, Age 58 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.231, Ward No.32, Kote area, Hosapete, Ballari District – 583101.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

(By Mr. Anwar Basha B., Advocate)

¶10

AND:

¶11

The State of Karnataka,

¶12

(Through Bailhongal P.S.) Represented by its State Public Prosecutor,

¶13

High Court of Karnataka, At Dharwad.

¶14

Gurunath Shirasangi

¶15

S/o. Basappa Shirasangi,

¶16

Age 45 years, Occ: Employee in Private Firm, R/o. At Bailhongal – 591102 Gundlurchal T., Bailhongal,

¶17

Belagavi District.

¶18

...Respondents

¶19

(Sri. Praveen Uppar, HCGP for R1)

¶20

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶21

: 2 :

¶22

¶23

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to quash the complaint, FIR registered in Crime No.322/2017 by Bailhongal Police, Belagavi, offences punishable under Section 420, 34 of IPC and all further proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶24

This petition coming on for Admission through physical hearing/video conferencing hearing this day, the court made the following:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner is physically present in the Court.

¶27

Heard the submission on I.A.No.1/2020 and

¶28

regarding Admission of the matter.

¶29

Considering the reasons shown in the

¶30

affidavit, accompanying I.A.No.2/2020 which is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking dispensation of production of certified copy of

¶31

FIR, the said I.A. is allowed and the production of certified copy of the FIR for the time being is dispensed with.

¶32

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶33

: 3 :

¶34

A perusal of the record would go to show

¶35

that, it is the case of the prosecution that the 2^nd respondent herein one Sri. Gurunath Shirsangi filed a complaint before the 1^st respondent – police station on 04.12.2017. The summary of the said complaint is that,

¶36

in the year 2010, a private limited company under the name and style of M/s. Jana Sneha Real Wealth Solution Private Limited started functioning in Jakkappanavar Complex of Bailhongal town. One Sri. Basavaraj Shivaraj Tammannavar (accused No.1) was the Managing Director of the said company. Accused Nos.2, 3 & 4 were respectively two Managers and a Treasurer of the said company. The company was floated with nine Directors joined by accused Nos.1 to 4. In the said company, the complainant started working as an Agent. There were several persons working as Agent like the complainant in the said company, whose names are also been shown in the complaint. The said company through

¶37

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶38

: 4 :

¶39

the accused was attracting deposits from the general public stating that they are going to double the deposit amount within three years. With such promises, through the complainant and various similarly placed Agents, the company collected huge sum of money. For about 4-5 years the company ran its business smoothly. Including the complainant several other Agents invested the money of the customers in the said company. However, from November, 2016 onwards the company started evading repayment of the deposited amount to its customers. Several of the customers started pestering

¶40

and demanding money with the complainant and similarly placed various other Agents. In turn the complainant and other Agents when asked the company and its Directors, they started postponing the matter on some false pretext. One fine day the company closed its business premises, put a lock to it and all the accused left the place and remained not available to the

¶41

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶42

: 5 :

¶43

complainant and to all other Agents. The complainant has given the details of the amount collected by 13 Agents for the company and deposited the amount in the company totaling to a sum of `1,13,45,728/-. The said complaint was registered in the respondent-police station in Crime No.322/2017 for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. It appears that in a remand application said to have been filed by the respondent-police on 06.05.2019, the Investigating Officer has referred to the voluntary statements said to have been given by few more accused, who are said to have referred to the name of the present petitioner also. It is based on the said reference to his name in the Remand Yadi dated 06.05.2019, the present petitioner claiming himself to be the accused No.5 in the said complaint with the 1^st respondent police has filed this petition seeking quashing of the FIR against him.

¶44

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶45

: 6 :

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner in his

¶47

arguments submitted that, there are no materials to show that the present petitioner was in any way involved in the alleged cheating by the company. Learned counsel referring to a notarized copy of a document which is shown to be an appointment letter dated 02.05.2011 mentions that the present petitioner was appointed as a Divisional Manager in the accused company, however, he resigned from the said post on 05.11.2012, which resignation was accepted by the company on 16.11.2012. Whereas, the present complaint was filed in the year 2017, much after acceptance of his resignation, as such, since he has got nothing to do with the alleged cheating said to have been committed by the company, the petition deserves to be admitted and I.A.No.1/2020 filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for stay of the further

¶48

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶49

: 7 :

¶50

proceedings of the Crime No.322/2017 of the 1^st

¶51

respondent police be stayed.

¶52

A perusal of the material placed before this

¶53

Court would go to show that, the complainant claims himself to be one among the not less 13 Agents who were said to have been working with the accused company by name Jana Sneha Real Wealth Solution Private Limited. In the very complaint itself he has made specific allegation that the company has cheated large number of general public after collecting an amount of `1,13,45,728/from the customers through the complainant and various other similarly placed Agents. No doubt the said complaint does not name the present petitioner in it. However, the Remand Yadi dated 06.05.2019 mentions the name of the present petitioner. In the said Remand Yadi, the Investigating Officer has shown that some of the co-accused including accused No.3 – Basavaraj Chandrashekar Hanchinamani

¶54

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶55

: 8 :

¶56

and other accused namely Chiranjeevi Late

¶57

Raghavendrarao Karnam, Mehaboob Kashimsab Mulla and Vijay Sudhir Tiwari (accused No.4) are shown to have given a detailed account of who were all involved in the alleged commission of crime. Among them, accused Nos.3 and 4 are shown to have specifically named the present petitioner also as one among the persons with whose connivance and active involvement the alleged crime has been taken place and that the present petitioner was also one among the persons who had shared the misappropriated amount which were collected from the customers. Thus, prima-facie and at this stage it can be seen that the Investigating Officer has collected information about the alleged involvement of the present petitioner also in the alleged commission of crime.

¶58

No doubt, the petitioner has placed a notarized copy of his appointment letter which shows that the petitioner appears to have appointed as a Divisional

¶59

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶60

: 9 :

¶61

Manager in the accused company on 02.05.2011 and that his resignation was subsequently accepted by the company on 16.11.2012. However, it is to be noticed that his resignation was only as a Divisional Manager, whereas, accused Nos.3 and 4 have stated that among the 17 Directors who were alleged to have involved in the commission of crime, the present petitioner was also one among them. Thus in the subsequent development after the alleged resignation of the petitioner there may also be a possibility of he being taken to the very same company as a Director. Furthermore, the alleged misappropriation of the fund by the company appears to have taken place at the said later period when the company is said to have containing 17 Directors including the present petitioner and these are all the matters which are to be investigated and only thereafter the truth can be found out. Therefore, merely because an FIR is filed and the present petitioner is appeared to

¶62

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶63

: 10 :

¶64

have been suspected as an accused in the alleged commission of crime, that itself cannot be a ground for the petitioner to seek either the stay of further proceeding of the investigation or quashing of the FIR against him when the truthfulness and veracity in the alleged voluntary statements of the co-accused has to be tested by the Investigating Officer, for which purpose the Investigating Officer may also have to consider the statements made by the co-accused that the present petitioner was one among the Directors of the said company and had actively involved in sharing the deposited amount of `1,13,45,728/- by the company. Therefore, either staying the further proceedings or quashing the FIR would only hamper the investigation. No inconvenience or prejudice would be caused to the petitioner and his interest, if he is asked to co-operate with the investigation. As such, neither I find any reason

¶65

Crl.P.No.101273/2020

¶66

: 11 :

¶67

to allow I.A.No.1/2020, nor for admitting the present petition.

¶68

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following

¶69

order:

¶70

ORDER

¶71

The petition stands dismissed at the stage of Admission itself.

¶72

Consequently, I.A.No.1/2020 also stands

¶73

dismissed.

¶74

Sd/JUDGE

¶75

*Svh/-

Venugopal Vaidya S/O Annayyachar Vaidya v. the State of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venugopal Vaidya S/O Annayyachar Vaidya v. the State of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Umadevi W/O Shankarrao Halgekar Vs the State of Karnataka

Anand S/O Omanna Patil Vs Sakira Khudabaz Bellary (Bellary)

Abhijit S/O Mahadev Kabade Vs Smt. Veena W/O Abhijit Kabade

Usha W/O Jogindarsing Badan, Vs Sri.Yallappa Balappa Naik

Kiran S/O. Chandrappa Hirekerur Vs the State of Karnataka

N Manjula D/O Thippaih Setty, Vs the State of Karnataka