Allowed

Abeed Ron v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Sept 2024CRL.A/945/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal under Section 14(A)(2) SC/ST (POA) Act against rejection of bail in a case involving cheating and atrocities allegations arising from a live-in relationship and monetary transactions. Investigation complete, charge-sheet filed; court granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order rejecting bail set aside; appellant released on bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties and conditions including no tampering or intimidation.

Abeed Ron Vs the State of Karnataka — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:36872 CRL.A No. 945 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 945 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

ABEED RON, S/O. ABDUL RAHAMAN, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/A NO.23, 18^TH CROSS, KANAKA NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH, R.T. NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 032

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. RANGANATHA T.R., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Digitally signed by BY YELAHANKA NEW TOWN POLICE STATION, YAMUNA K L BENGALURU-560 064. Location: High REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Court of Karnataka HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001

¶12

MS. SEEMA G., D/O G. THIPPANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, NO.6-310, 'VAISHNAVI SERENE', BEHIND CRPF, IVRI ROAD,

¶13

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:36872 CRL.A No. 945 of 2024

¶14

YELAHANKA, BANGALORE-560 064

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. KARTHIK KUMAR R., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶17

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.05.2024 PASSED BY THE LXX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.773/2024 IN REJECTING THE BAIL APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT U/S 439 OF CR.P.C.

¶18

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for appellant, Learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and learned counsel for Respondent No.2/de-facto complainant.

¶22

The appellant/accused is arrested in connection with Crime No.63/2024 of Yelahanka New Town Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 417, 420, 384 and 504 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:36872 CRL.A No. 945 of 2024

¶24

3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance, 2014 (in short SC/ST (POA) Act).

¶25

The learned Sessions Judge, by an Order dated 02.05.2024, has rejected the bail application filed by the accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶26

This appeal is preferred to set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge and to enlarge the appellant on bail.

¶27

The gist of the complaint dated 05.02.2024 lodged by Respondent No.2 is that, the appellant and the complainant were friends and their friendship turned into love and they were in a live-in relationship for the past one year. The complainant divorced her first husband in the month of November 2022. The appellant herein by showing some Sheriya papers, made the complainant to believe that he got divorce from his first wife. Both of

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:36872 CRL.A No. 945 of 2024

¶29

them were living together with mutual consent and decided to marry.

¶30

It is alleged that, when they were living together, appellant took a total sum of Rs.37.42 lakhs from the complainant, by cash. The said amount was given to the appellant by the complainant by taking loan, pledging her ornaments etc. Subsequently, the behaviour of the appellant changed drastically and he started ignoring the complainant. He was forcing the complainant to arrange Rs.1 crore to invest in some new business venture and the complainant tried to collect the said amount from one of her friends. However, the said amount could not be arranged. The appellant started black-mailing her to pay Rs.4 crores, threatening that otherwise he would leak her private pictures and videos in the internet etc. Later, the complainant came to know that the appellant has not divorced his wife. He stopped responding to her and thereby, caused mental harassment and cheated her etc.

¶31

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:36872 CRL.A No. 945 of 2024

¶32

The appellant claims to be innocent. It is contended that the entire allegations are false and frivolous. It is also contended that even if the entire allegations are accepted, it is in the nature of civil dispute. The ingredients of the offences alleged are not made out. The offences alleged are not punishable with death or imprisonment of life. The learned counsel further contended that there is already a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the complainant. He submitted, the appellant is ready and willing to abide by any conditions. Accordingly, he has sought to allow the appeal.

¶33

Opposing the prayer for bail, learned High Court Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 would contend that the allegations are serious in nature. The appellant has not only cheated the complainant to the tune of lakhs of rupees, but also abused and insulted the complainant, who belong to scheduled caste and there is one more case registered

¶34

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:36872 CRL.A No. 945 of 2024

¶35

against the appellant which is under investigation. It is contended that, if the appellant is enlarged on bail, he may try to intimidate the complainant and other prosecution witnesses.

¶36

The learned Sessions Judge, while dismissing the application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., has observed that the chances of accused absconding if released on bail seems reasonable one and more over, prima facie, it appears financial dispute and therefore, if the accused is granted bail, it would disrupt the fair-trial concept.

¶37

The allegations made against the accused have to be established in a full-fledged trial. Admittedly, the appellant and the complainant were friends and they were in a livein relationship. It is also not disputed that the complainant has filed a cheque-bounce case against the appellant. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet is also filed.

¶38

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:36872 CRL.A No. 945 of 2024

¶39

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the

¶40

case and also considering that the appellant has no criminal antecedents, by imposing necessary conditions, the relief sought in the appeal can be granted. The appellant is already interrogated. Accordingly, the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

The Order dated 02.05.2024 passed by the Court of LXX Addl. City Civil and Sessions and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in C.C.No.773/2024, is set aside.

¶43

Appellant/accused in Special C.No.773/2024, arising out of Crime No.63/2024 of Yelahanka New Town Police Station, Bengaluru city, is ordered to be released on bail, subject to following conditions:

¶44

i) He shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge.

¶45

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:36872 CRL.A No. 945 of 2024

¶46

ii) He shall furnish proof of his residential address and shall inform the Investigating Officer/Court if there is change in the address.

¶47

iii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution

¶48

witnesses/evidence in any manner.

¶49

iv) He shall not try to influence, intimidate or threaten

¶50

the complainant/victim directly or indirectly.

¶51

vi) He shall be regular in attending the trial proceedings.

¶52

If any of the above conditions are violated,

¶53

prosecution or the victim are at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail.

¶54

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶55

BNV

¶56

ct-snn/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

Abeed Ron v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abeed Ron 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

Fathima Alis Rathimathul Fasia Vs the State of Karnataka

Puneeth T S Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Rudrappa Vs State of Karnataka

Ram Rathan @ Nouratan Vs State of Karnataka

Madhu K Vs State by Police Sub Inspector

Shri Laxmikant S/O Gunavant Yelari Vs the State of Karnataka