Allowed

Mr Syed Sameer Ahmed v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Jun 2024CRL.P/5357/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a cheating and forgery case where the informant alleged he was induced to transfer over Rs.96 lakh on a false loan promise. Noting most funds were traced to a company account, the court granted bail with bond, sureties, appearance conditions and permission-based custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Bail in event of arrest in Crime No.145/2024; bond Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties; IO may conduct custodial interrogation with prior jurisdictional Magistrate permission.

Mr Syed Sameer Ahmed Vs State of Karnataka — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:21902 CRL.P No. 5357 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5357 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. SYED SAMEER AHMED, SON OF SRI. SYED ISMAIL AHMED AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT HARMAIN AVENUE FLAT NO.01, NANDI DURGA ROAD JAYAMAHAL EXTENSION ROAD BENGALURU - 560 046.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: high court of karnataka

¶11

(BY SRI. KIRAN S. JAVALI, SR. ADV. FOR SRI. DEVARAJAIAH .K.G., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE S.H.O. PULAKESHINAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING ANNEXE BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP)

¶16

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.145/2024 OF PULAKESHINAGAR P.S. BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 506, 34, 406, 420, 468, 471 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE 4^TH A.C.M.M BENGALURU.

¶17

THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:21902 CRL.P No. 5357 of 2024

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner-accused No.1 is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.145/2024, Pulakeshinagar Police Station, pending on the file of the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 406, 420, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informantAkmal Pasha.

¶22

Heard Sri Kiran S. Javali, learned Senior Advocate for Sri Devarajaiah K.G., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. K.P. Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶23

In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

¶24

“Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:21902 CRL.P No. 5357 of 2024

¶27

My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following:

¶28

R E A S O N S

¶29

The petitioner being accused No.1 is seeking grant of anticipatory bail on the apprehension of being arrested. The informant lodged the first information stating that he was the resident of Muscat and he came in contact with the petitioner and accused No.2. When he came to Bengaluru and wanted to invest in the land, the petitioner assured him of providing financial assistance and took Rs.2,00,000/- in cash. He was asked to transfer Rs.96,82,000/- to the account of a Private Limited Company stating that, he is the owner of the said Company and later, no loan was arranged by the petitioner. The informant came to know that the petitioner is running several fake Financial Institutions and extracting huge sums of money from various persons under the guise of providing them loan.

¶30

Even though the allegations made against the petitioner is of serious nature, it is stated that major portion of the amount i.e., Rs.92,85,000/- is transferred to the account of

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:21902 CRL.P No. 5357 of 2024

¶32

the Private Limited Company. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. Reasonable conditions may be imposed against the petitioner for his prompt appearance before the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer is at liberty to subject the petitioner for custodial interrogation in case of necessity with the permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶33

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the

¶34

affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

The petition is allowed.

¶37

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.145/2024 of Pulakeshinagar Police Station.

¶38

The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and on his appearance, the Investigating Officer shall enlarge him on bail subject to the following conditions:-

¶39

a. The petitioner shall furnish the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only)

¶40

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:21902 CRL.P No. 5357 of 2024

¶41

with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

¶42

b. The petitioner shall not commit similar offences;

¶43

c. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer or the Court as and when required;

¶44

d. The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses.

¶45

e. If in case, the Investigating Officer deems necessary for subjecting the petitioner for custodial interrogation, he is at liberty to do so with prior permission from the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶46

On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by him. On satisfaction of the said documents, he may proceed to accept the sureties within a reasonable time.

¶47

Sd/JUDGE

¶48

PN: List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38

Mr Syed Sameer Ahmed v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Syed Sameer Ahmed v. 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

Sri Adesh K a Alias Adesh Gowda Vs State by Sringeri Ps

Sri. L. S. Lokesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. L. S. Lokesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Chandramohan K G Vs State of Karnataka

Mohammed Usman, Vs State of Karnataka by