Allowed

Shashikumar H M v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Jun 2024CRL.P/5450/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed anticipatory bail in an anticipatory bail petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a cheating case. Granted subject to furnishing bond with sureties, not committing similar offences, appearing on demand, and not tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in the event of arrest subject to furnishing Rs.2,00,000 bond with two sureties and complying with specified conduct conditions.

Shashikumar H M Vs the State of Karnataka — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:22291 CRL.P No. 5450 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5450 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHASHIKUMAR H.M., S/O. MARISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT HANGARA BOYANAHALLI, DORANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, K.R. NAGAR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 602

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR .T., ADVOCATE)

¶10

Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: high court of karnataka

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, STATE BY NARASIMHARAJA POLICE STATION, MYSURU CITY - 570 001 REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI .K., HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN THE CR.NO.40/2024 REGISTERED NARASIMHARAJA POLICE STATION, MYSURU CITY DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 506, 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF 3^RD ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC COURT, MYSURU.

¶16

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

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:22291 CRL.P No. 5450 of 2024

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Petitioner-accused No.3 is before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.40/2024 of Narasimharaja Police Station, pending on the file of the learned III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC Court, Mysuru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informantSanthosh Kumar.

¶20

Heard Sri Vijay Kumar T., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rahul Rai K., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

¶21

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

¶22

“Whether the petitioner is entitled

¶23

for grant of bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?”

¶24

¶25

NC: 2024:KHC:22291 CRL.P No. 5450 of 2024

¶26

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

¶27

R E A S O N S

¶28

Petitioner being accused No.3 is seeking grant of anticipatory bail on the apprehension of being arrested. The informant filed the first information specifically stating that, accused No.1 introduced accused No.2 to secure a job to the relative of the complainant by name Kavya. It is stated that it was accused No.2, who promised to secure a job in KPTCL and extracted an amount of Rs.32 lakhs from the complainant by misleading him. It is stated that phone number of the petitioner was given by accused No.4 to the complainant and he has promised him to inform the dates for kavya to appear and join the duty, but later, he was not receiving the phone calls. The only allegation made against the present petitioner is that when the complainant had called, he has not received the phone calls. Since no serious allegations are made against the present petitioner, he may not be required for custodial interrogation. Reasonable conditions may be imposed against the petitioner for his prompt appearance before the

¶29

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:22291 CRL.P No. 5450 of 2024

¶30

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.

¶31

Accordingly, I answer the above point in the

¶32

affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The petition is allowed.

¶35

The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.40/2024 of Narasimharaja Police Station.

¶36

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:-

¶37

a. The petitioner shall furnish the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

¶38

b. The petitioner shall not commit similar offences;

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:22291 CRL.P No. 5450 of 2024

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

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.

¶43

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.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

PN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37

Shashikumar H M v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashikumar H M 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

Mr. Dhanush. v Vs the State by R.T. Nagar Police Station

Mr. Bikash Panda Vs State of Karnataka

Sisu Suren Alis Sisu Vs the State of Karnataka

S Rashmi Vs State of Karnataka

Jagadeesh Vs State by Kundapura Police Station

Shruthi Vs State of Karnataka by