IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 635 OF 2021 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY DEVARAJ POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.M.R.PATIL, HCGP)

AND:

1. SRINIVASA Digitally S/O LATE VENKATARMAIAH signed by AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, REKHA R GURUVAYYAN PALYA Location:

HALAPANAHALLI VILLAGE High Court of BAKTHARAHALLI POST Karnataka DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561203

2. SHAIK NAJIBULLA S/O JILLUR RAHIM SHAIK JAK AHAMED ARAMBAG, HONGIL-712615 WEST BENGAL

3. SANTOSH KUMAR MISHRA S/O BANAMALI MISHRA S MIRZAPURA, ACHUTPURA KYRA BALASUR, ORISSA-756 031

4. DAVID HASLAP R/O BAGPUL JAIPUL BIRABARASATH, 24 PARAGANA NORTH WEST BENGAL - 743 248 OFFICE MULTINATIONAL INDUSTRIES LTD 2ND FLOOR, NO.4 METROPOLITAN PLAZA H L SARKAR RASTHE, BANS DRONI, KOLKATTA

5. SANDEEP PAL S/O TARPADA PAL MOUZA GOPALAPURA, J L NO. 34 MIRAJPURA, KOTHALAPURA, BANKURA-722141 WEST BENGAL

6. SUCHANDRA GOSH S/O PARESHNATH NO.160/A, KALICHARAN GOSH ROAD, KOSIPURA, KOLKATTA -700 071 WEST BENGAL …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALIPATIL P S, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

V/O DTD: 06.03.2023 ISSUANCE OF NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS D/W)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE S.P.P FOR THE STATE PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 17.12.2019 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU IN CR.NO.46/2016 B. RESTORE THE CASE ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU IN CR.NO.46/2016 AND DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCE AGAINST THE RESPONDENTS-ACCUSED.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

ORAL ORDER

The State has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to set aside the judgment and order dated 17.12.2019 in Cr.No.46/2016 on the file of Prl.District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 109, 120 r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 9 of Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 2004 ('KPID Act, 2004' for short) and to restore the same to the file of District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru to enable it to take cognizance and proceed with the matter.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their ranks before the trial Court.

3. In support of the petition, the State has contended that the accused are running a company under the name and style of Alite India Ltd. The accused have colluded together and assuring general public return of their investment with highest interest and bonus, have collected huge amount under different schemes. However, later they have failed to return the same with interest.

3.1 Based on complaint filed by Sri.Chandrashekhar Aradhya, a case in Cr.No.46/2016 came to be registered and after investigation charge sheet is filed for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 109, 120 r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 9 of 'KPID Act, 2004. Since the issue involved is serious on the directions of the Government investigation was carried out by CID, invoking the provisions of KPID Act, 2004. However, the trial Court has rejected the charge sheet with a direction to the investigating officer to present the charge sheet before jurisdictional Court. Aggrieved by the same, this petition is filed on the following:

GROUNDS (i) The impugned order is erroneous and unsustainable. It is based mainly on the ground that there is lack of authority in the investigating officer, who has filed charge sheet and common charge sheet should have not been filed, as each offence is distinct and different. The entire approach of the trial Court in returning the charge sheet is erroneous. There is no application of mind. The trial Court has not appreciated the scheme, aims and objects of KPID Act, 2004. The Act is enacted with an aim not only protecting the i