1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G. UMA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4788 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

MR.ZAFAR B.M.

S/O LATE BETTU MEERA SAHEB

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

R/AT “ NIHAN MANZIL”, KANDLURU

KAVRADI VILLAGE

KUNDAPURA TALUK

UDUPI DISTRICT.

… PETITIONER

(BY SRI: NOORMOHAMMED, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE BY KUNDAPURA POLICE STATION

REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BENGALURU-560 001.

… RESPONDENT

(BY SRI: H.R.SHOWRI, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439

OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN

CR.NO.31/2021 OF KUNDAPURA P.S., UDUPI DISTRICT FOR THE

OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 406, 420, 120B OF

IPC AND SECTIONS 21, 22 OF BANNING OF UNREGULATED

DEPOSIT SCHEMES ACT AND SECTION 9 OF THE KARNATAKA

PROTECTION

OF

INTEREST

DEPOSITORS

IN

FINANCIAL

ESTABLISHMENT ACT.

2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS

THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

The petitioner-accused No.5 is before this Court

seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime

No.31/2021

of

Kundapura

Police

Station,

initially

registered for the offences punishable under Sections

120B, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (for short

'IPC') and subsequently transferred to CEN Police Station,

Udupi registered for the offences punishable under

Sections 120B, 406 and 420 of IPC and Sections 21 and 22

of Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act and

Section 9 of the Karnataka Protection of Interest

Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, on the basis of

the first information lodged by the informant Irshad

Gulzar.

2.

Heard Sri.Noormohammed, learned Counsel for

the petitioner and Sri.H R Showri, learned High Court

Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused

the materials placed on record.

3

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted

that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.5. He is the

Manager in the gold jewellery firm belonging to accused

Nos.1 to 4. The petitioner is not at all related to the

offences alleged to have been committed by accused Nos.1

to 4. The petitioner was apprehended on 15.03.2021 and

since then he is in judicial custody. Accused No.6 is said

to be the accountant in the said firm. He is already

enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Petition No.3485

of 2021 vide order dated 28.05.2021. The petitioner is

also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the principle of

parity. The petitioner is the permanent resident of the

address mentioned in the cause title to the petition and is

ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that

would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow

the petition.

4.

Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious

allegations are made against the petitioner and other

4

accused for having committed the offences. Huge quantity

of gold and cash is involved in this case. Accused Nos.1,

2, 4, 10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 22 are still

absconding. Only accused Nos.5 and 6 were apprehended.

The investigation is still at the initial stage. Under such

circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of

bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

5.

In view of the rival contentions urged by the

learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would

arise for my consideration is:

“Whether

the

petitioner

is

entitled for grant of bail under Section

439 of Cr.P.C.?”

My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for

the following:

R E A S O N S

6.

The materials placed before the Court makes

out a strong prima facie case against the petitioner.

Admittedly, he was apprehended on 15.03.2021. As per

5

the first information, the petitioner is working as Manager

in the firm. Accused Nos.6 is said to be the accountant

and he is already enlarged