The petitioner lodged the first information report

alleging that the accused Nos.1 to 5 induced the petitioner

to invest money with them assuring that the money

invested would be doubled.

2.

It is further alleged that on the inducement

made by the accused Nos.1 to 5, the petitioner invested

Rs.20,000/- with the accused Nos.1 to 5. However, even

after lapse of several days the accused Nos. 1 to 5 did not

return the money as assured. The petitioner suspecting

the activities of accused Nos.1 to 5, made an enquiry and

came to know that accused Nos.1 to 5, are in the habit of

receiving money by making false representation have

cheated general public. The FIR was registered against the

accused Nos. 1 to 5 for the offences punishable under

Section 406 and 420 of IPC.

3.

The

police

during

the

Course

of

the

investigation recorded the statement, of CW1 under

- 3 -

Section 161 of Cr.P.C. In the said statement he has stated

that the petitioner suggested him to invest Rs.20,000/-

and assurance was given that he would double the

invested money made by the CW1. On the basis of the

said statement, the police filed a charge sheet against the

petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 406

and 420 of IPC. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of

the said offences against the petitioner. Taking exception

to the same this petition is filed.

4.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that in the absence of any corroborative material,

the filing of charge sheet against the petitioner on the

basis of statement of CW1 is one without any substance.

He further submits that in the departmental enquiry, the

CW1 was examined as PW10 wherein he has clearly

denied the statement alleged to have been given by him

which was recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Hence,

he submits that the charge sheet filed against the

- 4 -

petitioner is in the absence of any corroborative material is

not sustainable in law.

5.

On

the

other

hand,

learned

High

Court

Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State

submits that the statement of CW1 clearly disclose that

the petitioner has cheated the said witness by assuring

that he would double the money invested by him. Hence,

the charge sheet filed against the petitioner is perfectly

illegal and does not warrant any interference.

6.

I have considered the submission made by the

learned counsel for the parties.

7.

The FIR was lodged by the petitioner against

the accused Nos.1 to 5. The police filed the charge sheet

against the petitioner by implicating him as additional

accused No.13. The charge sheet is filed against the

petitioner only on the basis of the statement of CW1

alleged to have been recorded under Section 161 of

Cr.P.C. In the departmental enquiry initiated against the

- 5 -

petitioner the said witness has categorically denied the

statement alleged to have been given by him before the

police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.

8.

Section

114

illustration

B

specifies

that

statement of an accomplice or co-accused is unworthy of

credit, unless he is corroborates in material evidence.

Since there is no corroborative material so as to establish

the guilt by the petitioner and the possibility of conviction

of the petitioner being remote and bleak, so as to prevent

the abuse of process of law, it would be appropriate to

quash the impugned proceeding pending against the

petitioner. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

i)

This petition is allowed.

ii)

The further proceedings in C.C.No.59/2019

pending on the file of the Principal Senior

Civil Judge and CJM Bagalkot insofar it

relates to the petitioner/accused No.13 is

hereby quashed.

- 6 -

iii)

In view of disposal of the matter, pending

interlocutory applications, if any, do not

survive for consideration and are dismissed

accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SSP