Shrinath Babu vs State Of Karnataka

H.P. Sandesh, J

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in respect of Crime No.135/2022 registered by Peenya Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that this petitioner and accused No.1 were having acquaintance with the husband of the complainant and accused No.1 and this petitioner both of them have persuaded the husband of the complainant to get the loan from the Co-operative Society and even though the complainant refused to sign the papers, persuaded her also to sign the papers and after availing the loan, amount was got transferred to the account of accused No.1 and they did not repay the amount. Then the bank started issuing notices against the husband of the complainant and the complainant. The husband of the complainant requested to make the payment and inspite of request, they did not heed to their request. On 25.04.2022, the husband of the complainant went near the house of accused No.1 saying that he will go and talk to him regarding loan amount, but he did not return and phone was also switched off. That on 27.04.2022, the complainant went near the house of accused No.1 and on enquiry, he replied that her husband has not visited the house and abused her. That on 28.04.2022, some unknown persons called the complainant and informed that her husband committed suicide in Krishnappa Layout and immediately she rushed to the spot and found the body. The allegation is made that this petitioner and accused No.1, who have availed the loan did not repay the amount and hence he took the extreme step of committing the suicide.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the husband of the complainant left the house on 25.04.2022 and body was found on 28.04.2022 and there is no nexus between the cause of death and taking the extreme step of committing the suicide. The learned counsel submits that this Court has already granted bail in favour of accused No.1, 3 and 4 in Crl.P.Nos.4505/2022 and 4479/2022, wherein this Court observed that whether it attracts Section 306 of IPC or not is a matter of trial and there must be a nexus and proximity to the cause of death and enlarged on bail.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that specific allegation is made against this petitioner and accused No.1 that both of them have persuaded in getting the loan and they did not repay the amount. The learned counsel submits that this Court granted bail invoking Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in respect of accused No.1 and granted anticipatory bail in respect of other accused persons, since the Court found that notice has been issued under Section 41A of Cr.P.C., wherein it is stated with regard to the conducting of mahazar in respect of availing of the loan and there is an apprehension of arrest.

Having heard the respective learned counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, specific allegation is made against this petitioner and accused No.1 that both of them had persuaded the husband of the complainant in getting the loan. On perusal of the contents of the complaint, after sanction of the loan, the amount was transferred in favour of accused No.1 i.e., Rs.40 lakhs which was sanctioned from Yeshaswini Co-operative Bank and both of them were making payment at the first instance and thereafter stopped making the repayment. Having taken note of the said fact into consideration, the amount was transferred in favour of accused No.1 and he has already been enlarged on bail by this Court and only allegation against this petitioner is that he persuaded along with accused No.1 in getting the loan and the husband of the complainant had left the house on 25.04.2022 and body was found on 28.04.2022. When such being the material available on record, it is appropriate to exercise the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. with a condition to cooperate with the Investigating Officer for investigation in the matter.

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.135/2022 registered by Peenya Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for.

(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer without prior permission till the charge-sheet is filed or for a period of three months, whichever is earlier.

(v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., on 30th of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., before the Investigating Officer for a period of three months or till the charge-sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.