Karnataka High Court
Sri Nagavalli vs State Of Karnataka on 25 July, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:29277
CRL.A No. 1240 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1240 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
SMT. NAGAVALLI
W/O RAJESH V R
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
No.267, SHIVA SHAKTI ARCADE
1ST FLOOR VIJAYA BANK LAYOUT
BANNERGHATTA ROAD
NEAR AYYAPPA SWAMY TEMPLE
Digitally signed by BILEKAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 076.
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI ...APPELLANT
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI KEMPEGOWDA M K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HANUMANTHANAGARA POLICE STATION
BENGALURU - 560 050.
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTORS
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI RANGASWAMY R, HCGP)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.16 OF KPIDFE ACT PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.05.2024 PASSED BY THE
PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU
IN CRL.MISC.No.3003/2024 AND ORDER TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT HANUMANTHANAGAR POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU TO RELEASE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF HER ARREST IN CR.No.288/2022 FOR THE ALLEGED
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:29277
CRL.A No. 1240 of 2024
OFFENCE P/U/S 409, 415, 417, 419, 420, 465, 468, 470, 471,
477-A, 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 9 OF KARNATAKA
PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL
ESTABLISHMENT ACT, 2004 AND SECTION 21 OF BANNING OF
UNREGULATED DEPOSIT SCHEMES ACT 2019 THE APPELLANT
IS SHOWN AS ACCUSED NO.23 AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND
ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
1. This appeal is filed by accused No.23, praying to
set-aside the order dated 14.05.2024 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.3003/2024 by the Principal City Civil and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereunder, the anticipatory
bail petition filed by this appellant - accused No.23 in
respect of Crime No.228/2022 registered for the offences
under Sections 409, 415, 417, 419, 420, 465, 468, 470,
471, 477A and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for
short hereinafter referred to as "IPC") and Section 9 of the
Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial
Establishment Act, 2004 (for short hereinafter referred to
NC: 2024:KHC:29277
as "KPIDFE Act") and Section 21 of Banning of
Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (for short
hereinafter referred to as "BUDS Act"), came to be
rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant - accused
No.23 and learned High Court Government Pleader for the
respondent - State.
3. In the complaint, it is alleged that this appellant -
accused No.23 has committed fraud and cheating by not
repaying the loan amount borrowed from M/s.New Friends
Multi-Purpose Souharda Co-operative Society and that,
she is one of the willful defaulter of the Society. The
appellant has been arrayed as accused No.23 in the F.I.R.
The appellant - accused No.23 apprehending her arrest
has filed the anticipatory bail petition and the same came
to be rejected by the impugned order, which is challenged
in this appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC:29277
4. Learned counsel for the appellant - accused No.23
would contend that this appellant - accused No.23 has
borrowed two secured loans in a sum of Rs.20.00 lakhs
and Rs.30.00 lakhs and she has mortgaged her property
by deposit of title deeds dated 14.01.2016 and
28.03.2016. As the loans are secured loans, there is no
question of any cheating or committing fraud by not
repaying the loan amount borrowed. The appellant -
accused No.23 is not the Director in M/s.New Friends
Multi-Purpose Souharda Co-operative Society. The major
offences are alleged against the Directors, who are alleged
to have lent loans without proper security and the
documents. Without considering these aspects, the
learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order
which requires interference by this Court. He submits that
the appellant - accused No.23 is ready to co-operate with
the police in the investigation. With this, he prayed to
allow the appeal and grant anticipatory bail to the
appellant - accused No.23.
NC: 2024:KHC:29277
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader
for the respondent - State would contend that this
appellant - accused No.23 and her husband have
borrowed loan and they have not repaid the loan amount
and huge amount is due. The appellant - accused No.23
is having hand in glove with the Directors of the Society.
The investigation is in progress and therefore, the
appellant - accused No.23 is not entitled for grant of
anticipatory bail. With this, he prayed to dismiss the
appeal.
6. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has
perused the impugned order and the materials placed on
record.
7. A complaint has been lodged by the Managing
Director of M/s.New Friends Multi-Purpose Souharda
Co-operative Society, Malleswaram, Bengaluru against
43 accused persons. Out of them, some of the accused
are the Chairman, Vice Chairman and the Directors of
M/s.New Friends Multi-Purpose Souharda Co-operative
NC: 2024:KHC:29277
Society and some are the borrowers of loan from the said
Society. This appellant - accused No.23 is also one of the
borrower of loan from the said Society. In the appeal
memo, it is stated that this appellant - accused No.23 has
borrowed a sum of Rs.20.00 lakhs and Rs.30.00 lakhs, as
housing loan and she has executed two mortgage deeds,
one dated 14.01.2016 and another dated 28.03.2016.
Considering the said aspect, the loan availed by the
appellant - accused No.23 are secured loans. Mere non
repayment of the loan borrowed does not amount to any
offence. Whether this appellant - accused No.23 has
committed any offence as alleged, is a matter of
investigation. This appellant - accused No.23 is not a
financial establishment as defined in the KPIDFE Act, 2004
or the BUDS Act, 2019, to attract the offence under those
Acts. Therefore, the appellant - accused No.23 is entitled
for grant of anticipatory bail with conditions, as she has
undertaken to co-operate with the police in the
investigation. Without considering these aspects, the
learned Sessions Judge has passed the impugned order,
NC: 2024:KHC:29277
which requires interference by this Court. In the result,
the following;
ORDER
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
14.05.2024 passed in Crl.Misc.No.3003/2024 by the
Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru is
set-aside. The anticipatory bail petition of this appellant -
accused No.23 stands allowed. The appellant - accused
No.23 is ordered to be released on bail in the event of her
arrest in Crime No.288/2022 of Hanumanthnagar Police
Station, subject to the following conditions;
(i) The appellant - accused No.23 shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (One
lakh only), with one surety for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(ii) The appellant - accused No.23 shall appear
before the Investigating Officer within fifteen
days from the date of receipt of a certified copy
of this order and execute the bail bond and
furnish the surety.
(iii) The appellant - accused No.23 shall make
herself available for interrogation by the police.
(iv) The appellant - accused No.23 shall not
directly or indirectly make any inducement,
NC: 2024:KHC:29277
threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case, so as to dissuade them
from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police officer.
(v) The appellant - accused No.23 shall not
leave India, without prior permission of the
Court.
(vi) The appellant - accused No.23 shall
co-operate with the Investigating Officer in the
investigation.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
GH
