AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rajendra Badamikar, J
The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Lashkar Police Station Crime No.10/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 409, 420, 477(A) read with Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of the 4th Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) & JMFC Court, Mysuru.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
The allegation of the prosecution discloses that the present petitioner and the other accused have cancelled four demand drafts of total amount of Rs.45,48,052.74/- which were in the custody of the bank. The said amount were credited to parking account of the branch and then it was transferred to the customers’ account to whom it does not belong. It is further alleged that thereafter, without the consent of those customers, again the amount was invested in mutual fund on 30.03.2022 and again on 07.04.2022 the amount was withdrawn from mutual fund and transferred to the respective customers’ account, who are in no way concerned. Again four demand drafts were created and the amount was credited to the bank. Hence, it is alleged that there was a temporary misappropriation by the petitioner and the other accused and they have committed a criminal breach of trust. As such, this complaint came to be lodged. On the basis of the complaint, FIR came to be registered and apprehending his arrest the petitioner has approached the learned Sessions Judge seeking anticipatory bail, but the learned Sessions Judge has rejected his bail petition. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.
During the course of the hearing, the petitioner/accused No.1 has also filed an affidavit stating that, the entries caused by him in the system on 30.03.2022 regarding debit is as per the instructions of accused Nos.2 and 3. It is further submitted that the petitioner is only required to make entry, and they are required to be approved by the higher officers, i.e., accused Nos.2 and 3 and he would also submit that he is made as a scape goat. He further filed an affidavit stating that, he is prepared to become his approver for the prosecution. Looking to this affidavit it is evident that the petitioner has come with a specific defence that his act was as per the directions of accused Nos.2 and 3 and that he has also undertaken to become an approver. He has required to move an application under Section 306 of Cr.P.C. before the competent Court. However, he has made his intention clear. Hence, I do not find any impediment for admitting the petitioner on bail. The other apprehensions raised by the learned High Court Government Pleader can be meted out by imposing certain conditions. Hence, the petition needs to be allowed and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is allowed.
The petitioner/Accused No.1 is directed to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.10/2024 of Lashkar Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 477(A) read with Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of IV Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) & JMFC Court, Mysuru, on his executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer or the concerned trial Court, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioner/accused No.1 shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and in the event his of surrender, Investigating Officer/SHO shall release him on bail as directed.
(ii) He shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) He shall not indulge in any similar offences.
(iv) He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for during course of investigation.
(v) In case the petitioner fails to act as per his undertaking by way of filing an application to act as an approver, the Investigating Agency is at liberty to move to the Court for cancellation of the bail.