G.B.Prashanth vs State Of Karnataka

K. Natarajan, J

This petition is filed by petitioner/accused No.4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for granting bail in Crime No.109/2020 registered by Alanahally

Police, Mysuru for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 read with 34 of IPC and Section 9 of the Karnataka Protection of Interest

Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2004 (‘KPID Act’ for brevity).

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent.

The case of the prosecution is that one Basavaraju filed the complaint before the Police on 07.12.2020. The Police registered the case against the

Directors, Managing Directors, President and Vice-President of Yashaswini House Building Co-operative Society (‘Petitioner’s Society’

for brevity) alleging that they have collected more than Rs.80,00,00,000/-(Rupees Eighty Crores) from the complainant and from 1,500 members by

giving false promise that they will provide sites to them on payment of equal installment under different schemes. Nearly 1500 members who have

invested the amount in the Petitioner’s Society were not allotted any sites from the year 2011 till date. Therefore, the complaint was filed to take

action against the petitioner/accused. After registering the case, the police arrested accused Nos.1 and 4 and the petitioner herein (in Crime

No.117/2020) on 11.02.2021, a body warrant has been issued and taken this petitioner into the custody on 18.03.2021. The petitioner has approached

the trial Court as well as the Sessions Court for grant of bail, which came to be rejected. Hence, he is before this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in the case.

In fact, in Crime No.117/2020 he has been arrested by the police on the allegation that he has sold a property measuring 0.15 guntas and he has been

granted bail by the learned Magistrate. This petitioner is in custody since from February, 2021, almost the investigation is completed. The only

allegation against the petitioner herein and accused No.5 â€" Sathish. R is that they have purchased the land for a sum of Rs.1,50,00,000/-(Rupees

One Crore Fifty Lakhs Only) in the name of M. Hemavathi, measuring 1 acre 32 guntas which has nothing to do with the Society. The said M.

Hemavathi is a different person. The only allegation is that he has sold 0.15 guntas of land in the name of C.K. Devaraju wherein, the Society has

given an endorsement for giving the same land to C.K.Devaraju for joint development purpose for forming his site on 23.03.2016, the sale deed was

effected on 31.03.2016. Therefore, it cannot be said that he has cheated any person and misused the amount. The offence is not punishable with death

or imprisonment for life. Hence, prayed for granting bail.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader seriously objected the bail petition and contended that the bail petition of the co-accused

persons were rejected by this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., and the investigation is still under progress. The petitioner was a Director and Vice-

President of the Society. He has misappropriated Crores of rupees belonging to the public. Therefore, he is not entitled for bail. Hence, she prayed for

dismissal of the bail petition.

Heard the arguments and perused the records. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was a Director and former Vice-President of Yashaswini

Housing Co-operative Society and accused Nos.4 and 5 were arrested on 11.02.2021, a separate case has been registered against him in Crime

No.117/2020 on the allegation that out of the Society amount, he has purchased the land and the same was sold to one C.K. Devaraju. Therefore, he

has cheated the public. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the documents which show that of course, the land in

question measuring 0.15 guntas has been purchased by the petitioner in August, 2015 from one Tulasi. Thereafter, he has sold the same to one C.K.

Devaraju on 31.03.2016 whereas, the Society has given a letter on 23.03.2016 stating that the said land has been purchased out of the fund of the

Society and therefore, they advised him to give the said land to C.K. Devaraju for development purpose and for forming a site which reveals that

there is a contradiction between their contention that the land has been given to one C.K. Devaraju for joint development purpose. Of course, the trial

Court has granted bail but the same was not challenged by the prosecution by filing an application.

I have perused the order where the learned trial Judge has not at all whispered anything about the amount received from the various persons,

however the complaint in the present Crime No.109/2020 has been overlooked by the trial Court. In this case, the complainant reveals that they have

collected more than Rs.80,00,00,000/- (Rupees Eighty Crores Only) from the more than 1,500 persons who made us members and paid various

amounts but in spite of completion of 10 years, they have not formed any society or layouts and have not allotted the same to the members which goes

to show that there is a clear misappropriation of amount and cheating the public. In the earlier petition in Crl.P.No.1448/2021 dated 18.03.2021, this

Court has elaborately dealt with the case and has rejected the bail petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner was a Director and Vice

President and reveals that he has purchased the land out of the Society money in his own name and later, he has given to one C.K. Devaraju,

purchaser, for the purpose of joint development, the question of executing the sale deed does not arise. There must be a joint development agreement

between the owner and the developer. That apart, another allegation is that on 08.06.2016, they have collected a sum of Rs.6,00,00,000/- (Rupees Six

Crores Only) and out of Rs.6,00,00,000/- (Rupees Six Crores Only), Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lakhs Only) has been spent for

purchasing a land in Sy.No.64/D, measuring 1 acre 32 guntas in the name of one M.Hemavathi. Though, the learned counsel submits that there is no

connection between one M. Hemavathi but the sale proceeds paid by the petitioner along with Sathish is the amount belonged to the public which is

from the Society and they have misappropriated the amount. The investigation is still pending.

Therefore, I am of the view that the petitioner is involved in a serious offence by cheating a large number of public, more than 1,500 people by

collecting more than Rs.80,00,00,000/- (Rupees Eighty Crores Only) and they have not provided the sites or formed any layout but they tried to sell the

land. Therefore, this petitioner is not entitled for bail.

Accordingly, the bail petition filed by the petitioner/accused No.4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., is dismissed.