This petition is filed by the petitioner/Accused

No.6 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail

in Crime No.118/2022 of Mandya West Police Station,

registered for the offences punishable under Sections

120B, 323, 506, 342, 363, 364A, 368, 384, 385, 386,

395 and 420 read with Section 149 of IPC, pending on

the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Senior Division) and CJM

Court, Mandya.

2.

Heard the arguments advanced by the

learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High

Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. Heard

the learned counsel for the complainant-aggrieved

person. Perused the records.

3.

The brief factual matrix leading to the case

are that the complainant is a proprietor of Srinidhi Gold

Company in Mandya. On 26.02.2022 he had reserved a

ticket from Mandya to Mangalore via Mysore in KSRTC

Rajahamsa bus and as such he was waiting near

3

KSRTC bus-stand at Mandya to board a bus. At about

8.00 p.m. a car came near him and inmates have

enquired with him that whether he was owner of the

Srinidhi Gold Company and reasons for he waiting

there. Then the complainant admitted that he was the

owner of the Srinidhi Gold Company and replied that

he was waiting for a Mangalore bus via Mysore. Then

the inmates of the car offered the complainant to drop

him at Mysore. Since the inmates of the car shown

acquaintance, the complainant has agreed and boarded

the car. In the car one lady by name Salma Banu and

one Jayanth got themselves introduced. When they

reached Mysore the inmates of the car requested the

complainant that their friends have brought some gold

biscuits and they were staying at Darshan Palace and

requested him to check the biscuits to confirm as to

whether they are real or fake. However, initially

complainant denied on the ground that he was getting

late and he is going to miss the Mangalore bus. But the

said persons assured him that they will drop him to the

4

bus stand and it is a matter of five minutes. Then they

drove to Darshan Palace hotel and there they entered a

room and immediately a girl aged about 22-25 years

entered the room and other inmates of the car

suddenly disappeared. Then other 3-4 persons entered

the room and started accusing the complainant that he

had brought that girl who later on entered in to the

room and they have taken certain photographs. Then

they confined the complainant in the room and

demanded ransom of Rs.4 crores. However, later on it

was settled for Rs.50,00,000/-. On the next day

morning by 10.00 clock the complainant from different

persons

secured

Rs.50,00,000/-

and

same

was

received by the accused and he was released. Then the

complainant returned to his house. However, after 6

months he lodged a complaint on the ground that

again there was a demand for additional amount. On

the basis of this complaint the crime came to be

registered and the present petitioner came to be

apprehended. The investigating officer has also said to

5

have recovered Rs.88,000/- from the petitioner who is

arraigned as accused No.6 and later on he was

remanded to judicial custody. The petitioner has

approached the learned sessions judge and the learned

sessions judge has rejected his bail petition. Hence,

the petitioner is before this Court.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends

that the name of the petitioner does not find place in

the complaint and though the alleged offence is said to

have taken place on 26.02.2022 the complaint came to

be lodged on 19.08.2022 after lapse of nearly 6

months. It is also alleged that complainant belongs to

a political party and question of he committing delay

does not arise at all. It is also alleged that money was

collected in Mysore, but complaint came to be lodged

in Mandya and entire case of the prosecution rests on

narration of the complainant without there being any

document. He would also contend that there are no

material documents to show that any incident as

alleged dated 26.02.2022 has occurred and regarding

6

payment of ransom of Rs.50,00,000/-