IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1305 OF 2012 C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1274 OF 2012 IN CRL.A No. 1305/2012 BETWEEN:

B. PRITHVIRAJ REDDY, S/O LATE B. JANARDHAN REDDY, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, KAKATHIYA TRAVELS, NO.3-5-889, HIMAYATH NAGAR, HYDERBAD-29(AP)

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. PARAMESHWAR N. HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA Digitally BY CBI, ACB, BANGALORE.

signed by …RESPONDENT MALATESH (BY SRI. P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

K C THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.374(2) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO Location:

SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF HIGH SENTENCE DATED 31.10.2012 PASSED BY THE XLVII ADDL.

COURT OF C.C. & S.J. & SPL. JUDGE FOR CBI CASES, BANGALORE IN KARNATAKA SPL.C.C.NO.117/2005- CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120(B), 420, 109 R/W 419 ,468 AND

471 OF IPC.

IN CRL.A NO. 1274/2012 BETWEEN:

1. P D S R V PRASAD RAJU @ DURGA PRASAD @ PRASAD RAJU, S/O LATE APALA RAJU, AGED ABOAUT 60 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.407, KAILAS TOWERS, PUTTANAHALLI VILLAGE, ABOVE FOOD WORLD NEW TOWN, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE - 64.

2. P. VENKATAPATHI RAJU, S/O. LATE APALA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.407, KAILAS TOWERS, PUTTANAHALLI VILLAGE, ABOVE FOOD WORLD, NEW TOWN YELAHANKA, BANGALORE - 64.

...APPELLANTS (BY SRI.R.NAGENDRA NAIK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE BY CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, GANGANAGAR, BANGALORE.

...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.374(2) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND CONVICTION DATED 31.10.2012 PASSED BY THE XLVII ADDL. C.C. & S.J. & SPL. JUDGE FOR CBI CASES, BANGALORE IN SPL.C.C.NO.117/2005-CONVICTING THE APPELLANTS /ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120(B), 420, 109 R/W 149, 468 AND 471 OF IPC.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL JUDGMENT

Though the matter is listed for return of the non bailable warrant issued in Crl.A.No.1274/2012 by virtue of the order passed by this Court on the application filed by the appellants today, by consent of the parties, appeals are taken up for final disposal.

2. Heard Sri.Parameshwar N. Hegde and Sri.R.Nagendra Naik, learned Advocates for the appellants and Sri.P.Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. At the outset, Sri.Parameshwar N. Hegde and Sri.R.Nagendra Naik, learned Advocates contended that they may not seriously challenged the order of conviction but they restricted their arguments with vehemence on the question of sentence to be modified.

4. Sri.Parameshwar N. Hegde, learned counsel for the appellant in Crl.A.No.1305/2012 however, tried to convince the Court that no role was played by the appellant and judgment of the Trial Court is based on surmises and conjectures and in the event, this Court upholding the order of conviction, taking note of the fact that incident has occurred long back and role assigned to the appellant is limited, sentence of imprisonment ordered by the learned Special Judge may be set aside by enhancing the fine amount reasonably.

5. Sri.R.Nagendra Naik, learned counsel for the appellant in Crl.A.No.1274/2012 would contend that the health condition of the appellants are very fragile and they are unable to move around and their business concerns have also come to stand still and it is only the sons of the appellants who are doing the job in a private company are required to pay the reasonable fine amount in the event, this Court setting aside the imprisonment period taking note of the health conditions of the appellants.

6. Sri.P.Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submission made on behalf of the appellants stating that huge sum of money is still due to the bank and even though accused Nos.1 and 2 are acquitted, it is the present appellants who are the beneficiaries. Therefore, they are required to repatriate the entire loss