Allowed

Smt Laxmi W/O Uday Alias Udaykumar Shetty v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 May 2023CRL.P/100435/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for offences alleged to be cheating and criminal breach of trust. The Court noted an abnormal delay in filing the complaint and absence of death penalty provisions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed. Petitioner to execute a bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties and appear for interrogation.

Smt Laxmi W/O Uday Alias Udaykumar Shetty Vs the… — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - CRL.P No. 100435 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100435 OF 2023 (438

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. LAXMI W/O UDAY @ UDAYKUMAR SHETTY AGE: 42 YEARS,OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: M/S SHARP COMPUTERS, YASH PLAZA, 2^ND FLOOR CIVIL HOSPITAL ROAD, NEAR KOLHAPUR CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH CEN CRIME PS, BELAGAVI NOW REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH AT DHARWAD.

¶12

SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 438 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO. 07/2023 BY THE RESPONDENT CEN CRIME POLICE STATION BELAGAVI, REGISTERED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 409, 416 AND 420 OF IPC.

¶16

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

¶17

2 - CRL.P No. 100435 of 2023

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Heard on bail application.

¶20

On the basis of the complaint filed by R.V. Manjunath, the Senior Technical Assistant in Karnataka State Electronics Corporation Limited (KEONICS) the CEN Crime Police, Belagavi city have registered the case in Crime No.7/2023 against the petitioner for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 409, 416 and 420 of IPC.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is one R.V. Manjunath, Senior. Technical Assistant in Karnataka State Electronics Development Corporation Limited (KEONICS) is the complainant. In the complaint, it is alleged that, as per the Govt. Order dated 25.11.2006. Government of Karnataka undertaking to take all YUVA.Com Centers under its control and continue the centres under KEONICS name by executing an agreement for providing computer education and services in Karnataka as per the requirements and guidelines of KEONICS subject to certain

¶22

3 - CRL.P No. 100435 of 2023

¶23

conditions. Petitioner entered into an agreement dated 13.09.2007 styled as KEONICS YUVA.COM with “KEONICS” to work as one of the franchisees of KEONICS to conduct training activities in Belagavi District in computer education and services with prescribed conditions. It is alleged that as per the guidelines of KEONICS, one of the conditions of the agreement was that the franchisee shall pay the royalty to the KEONICS for the services rendered by it. It is further alleged that as per the documents submitted, it is noticed that, petitioner has violated the conditions and acted adversely to the interest of the complainant-company and accumulated huge money by wrongly representing the Government Departments/ Organizations/ Universities etc., and cheated them as well as the company and enriched himself by unlawful means.

¶24

It is further alleged that the bank statement of Corporation Bank, the application for opening the account in respect of account No:209001601000097, Corporation Bank, Nehru Nagar, Belagavi clearly show that, petitioner

¶25

4 - CRL.P No. 100435 of 2023

¶26

falsely represented herself as the head of the KEONICS YUVA.COM, Opened the account in the name of M/s KEONICS YUVA.COM and thereby cheated the KEONICS company so also the Government Departments/ Organizations/ Universities.

¶27

It is further alleged that, the letter dated 23.02.2019 by the Finance Officer, Rani Chennamma University, Belagavi the said petitioner has directly engaged the computer training with the students of the said University and directly received the payments from the University to the accounts opened in the name of KEONICS YUVA.COM by the petitioner and dealt with the money deposited to the said account. Apart from this, petitioner failed to pay the Royalty to KEONICS and misused the whole money for herself and cheated KEONICS.

¶28

Thus the accused has committed the alleged commission of offence.

¶29

5 - CRL.P No. 100435 of 2023

¶30

7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for

¶31

petitioner that, the accused has not committed any offences as alleged against her in para No.7 of the complaint, it is clearly stated that, from the letter dated 23.02.2019 by the Finance Officer, Ranichannamma University, Belagavi, the M/s.Sharp Computers, the franchise of KEONICS has directly engaged in computer training with the students of the said University and directly received the payments from the University to the accounts opened in the name of KEONICS YUVA.COM by the said Smt. Laxmi Udaya Shetty, the Proprietor of the M/s.Sharp Computers and dealt with the money deposited to the said account. Apart from this the said Smt.Laxmi Udaya Shetty, the Proprietor of the M/s.Sharp Computers, Belagavi, failed to pay the royalty to the KEONICS and misused the whole money for herself and cheated KEONICS. Though the complainant has received this letter in the year 2019 he has not filed any complaint to the police till more than 4 years from the date of the alleged act of the petitioner. Further, it is submitted that, in the

¶32

6 - CRL.P No. 100435 of 2023

¶33

complaint there is no reference as to the alleged transfer of amount of Rs.2,50,30,894/- however, the investigating officer has inserted the same in the FIR. The petitioner is ready to abide the conditions imposed by this Court. On all these grounds petitioner is sought for allowing this bail petition.

¶34

On perusal of the complaint in para No.7 it is stated as under:

¶35

“7. From the letter dated:23/02/2019 by the Finance Officer, Rani Chennamma University, Belagavi the said M/s Sharp Computers, the franchise of KEONICS has directly engaged the computer training with the students of the said University and directly received the payments from the University to the accounts opened in the name of KEONICS YUVA.COM by the said Smt. Lakshmi Udaya Shetty, Proprietor of M/s. Sharp computers, and dealt with the money deposited to the said account. Apart from this, said Smt. Lakshmi Udaya Shetty, Proprietor of M/s.Sharp Computers, Belagavi, failed to pay the Royalty to KEONICS and misused the whole money for herself and cheated KEONICS.”

¶36

7 - CRL.P No. 100435 of 2023

¶37

A careful scrutiny of the contents of complaint

¶38

the complainant has not stated anything about the alleged disputed amount of Rs.2,50,30,894/- which is shown in the FIR, on what basis the investigation officer has inserted this alleged amount of Rs.2,50,30,894/- has not been explained by the investigating officer and admittedly, there is a abnormal delay of more than 4 years in filing this complaint. The alleged commission of offences are not punishable with imprisonment for death. Considering the nature and gravity of offence, delay in filing the complaint, age and occupation of the petitioner, it is just and proper to release the accused on bail on conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶39

ORDER

¶40

The bail application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of his arrest, in connection with Crime No.7/2023, registered by the CEN Crime Police

¶41

8 - CRL.P No. 100435 of 2023

¶42

Station, Belagavi, if not required in any other case,

¶43

subject to conditions that,

¶44

(a) the petitioner shall execute a self-bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

¶45

(b) the petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation by the Police/Investigating Officer as and when required;

¶46

(c) the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶47

(d) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned police station/court without previous permission of the Court; and

¶48

(e) the petitioner shall not commit any offence/s of which he is accused of.

¶49

(Sd/-) JUDGE

Smt Laxmi W/O Uday Alias Udaykumar Shetty v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Laxmi W/O Uday Alias Udaykumar Shetty 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

Vishwanath S/O Eranna Alias Veeranna Kabber Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri. Veereshayya S/O Eshwarayya Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Kempanna Mallappa Basargi Vs the State of Karnataka

Santosh K R S/O Karabasappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Jafar Sadiq S/O. Raja Sab Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Manjunath S/O Venkatraman Shetty Vs the State of Karnataka