Allowed

Nagaraja v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 May 2022CRL.P/1216/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a criminal case involving alleged cheating and prize chit offences. The court imposed conditions including execution of a bond, cooperation with investigation, and periodic attendance before the Investigating Officer.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to execution of bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sureties, surrender within ten days, cooperation with investigation, and no tampering with witnesses.

Nagaraja Vs the State of Karnataka — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF MAY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1216/2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

NAGARAJA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O. HULIGEPPA K.S., R/AT NO.1948/73/03, 4^TH MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, NEAR TAILS FACTORY, YALLAMMA NAGARA, DAVANAGERE-577006. … PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI SAMIULLA HORKERI, ADVOCATE )

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY EXTENSION POLICE STATION, DAVANAGERE-577502. REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU-560001. … RESPONDENT

¶12

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)

¶13

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.232/2021 OF DAVANAGERE EXTENSION P.S., DAVANAGERE DISTRICT FOR

¶14

¶15

THE OFFENCES P/U/S 420, 506 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3, 4 OF PRIZE CHITS AND MONEY CIRCULATION SCHEMES (BANNING) ACT, ON THE FILE OF THE I JMFC, DAVANAGERE.

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying

¶19

to enlarge the petitioner/accused on bail, in the event of his arrest in respect of Crime No.232/2021 registered by Davanagere Extension Police Station, Davanagere City SubDivision, Davanagere, for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶21

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

¶22

The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the complainant is the subscriber of the chit run by this petitioner and he had paid the amount of Rs.23,000/- each for a period of 20 months and in all, he paid an amount of

¶23

¶24

Rs.4,60,000/-. After the closure of the chit, when the complainant demanded money, inspite of the fact that the petitioner had promised to pay the amount, he did not repay the amount and when he made persistent demand, threat was caused to the complainant and also to his wife. Based on the complaint, the police have registered the case for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

¶26

this petitioner is a practicing Advocate and he is not running any chit as alleged in the complaint. The counsel would submit that the complainant himself had borrowed an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- and gave the cheques and the same are in the custody of this petitioner and when he demanded money, a false complaint is lodged against the petitioner. The counsel would also submit that the petitioner has also produced a copy of Karnataka State Bar Council Enrollment Certificate along with the petition. The counsel would further submit that, in the

¶27

¶28

complaint itself, it is stated with regard to the fact that, earlier also, he had approached the police and police have not registered the case and only with an intention to avoid payment, a false complaint is filed.

¶29

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that specific allegations are made against this petitioner that he is running a chit and an amount of Rs.23,000/- was paid every month for about 20 months and the same was not repaid.

¶30

Having heard the respective counsel and also on perusal of the contents of the complaint and also the documents placed before the Court along with the petition that this petitioner is an Advocate, allegation is made with regard to nonpayment of chit fund and hence, the matter has to be probed. However, this Court can grant the relief of anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner with a direction to appear before the Investigating Officer and co-operate for the investigation in the matter. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner, subject to

¶31

¶32

imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:-

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioneraccused shall be released on bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.232/2021 registered by Davanagere Extension Police Station, Davanagere City Sub-Division, Davanagere, for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 , subject to the following conditions:-

¶35

(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.

¶36

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶37

¶38

(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.

¶39

(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer without prior permission till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months, whichever is earlier.

¶40

(v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., on 30^th of every month between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a period of three months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

Nagaraja v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagaraja v. the State of Karnataka

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

Vinuth B.G. Vs State of Karnataka

Naveen @ Smile Naveen Vs State of Karnataka

Sri H S Manju Vs State of Karnataka

Lingaraju Vs State of Karnataka

Noor Jaan @ Noorunissa Vs State of Karnataka

K Kiran Kumar Vs State of Karnataka