The case of the petitioner is that, she invested a sum of

Rs.4,00,000/- with a company called V3 Life Care Private India

Company Ltd., and one Santoshkumar was its Director responsible

for functioning of the company. Many persons like the petitioner

also invested in the said company. The said Santoshkumar and

two others involved in the business of the company, cheated the

petitioner and similarly situated persons. Hence, one of the

investors lodged a police complaint. Upon investigation, it was

found that about 35 persons including the petitioner herein had

invested a total sum of Rs.32,10,000/- with the company and the

persons responsible for functioning of the company who cheated all

of them. During the course of investigation, when the police raided

the premises of Santoshkumar, apart from few documents, they

recovered a sum of Rs.20,90,000/- from the said Santoshkumar.

C.C.No.315/2016 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and CJM,

Koppal, has been filed against the said Santoshkumar and two

others and they have been charged for the offences punishable

under Sections 465, 420, 468, 471, 109 and 201 read with Section

34 of the IPC.

- 3 -

2.

Thereafter, the petitioner made an application under

Section 457 Crl.P.C. before the trial Court in CC No.315/2016 with

a prayer to release the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- seized from the

accused. On the ground that the perusal of the papers reveal that

the accused had deceived a total amount of Rs.32,10,000/-

belonging to different investors, but only a sum of Rs.20,90,000/-

has been seized and if the amount of the petitioner were to be

released in his favour, they may not be in a position to produce the

said money during the trial, the application filed by the petitioner

has been dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the instant petition is

filed.

3.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that,

admittedly, the accused had cheated 35 persons to a tune of

Rs.32,10,000/- and the petitioner has been cheated a sum of

Rs.4,00,000/-. Of the said cheated amount, a sum of

Rs.20,90,000/- has been recovered, which amounts to about 65%

of the total amounts cheated by the accused. No harm would be

caused if 65% of the amount due to the petitioner is released in

favour of the petitioner from the amounts recovered from the

accused. It is further submitted, details of the depositors and the

- 4 -

amount that the accused is liable to pay to the said depositors has

been filed before the trial Court by way of memo and ignoring the

same the impugned order is passed. On the said ground it is

prayed that suitable orders will be passed, wherein 65% of

Rs.4,00,000/- be directed to be released in favour of the petitioner.

Further, reliance is placed on the judgment passed in

Crl.P.No.100156/2021

and

contended

that

under

similar

circumstances, the coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to

pass an order in favour of the petitioner therein.

4.

Per contra, learned HCGP justifies the impugned order

and prays for dismissal of the criminal petition.

5.

No doubt, a complaint has been lodged against the

accused for cheating and in the course of investigation, the police

have come to the conclusion that the accused have cheated 35

persons to a tune of Rs.32,10,000/- and they owe the petitioner a

sum of Rs.4,00,000/- and they have also seized a sum of

Rs.20,90,000/- when they raided the premises of the accused. But

it is contended on behalf of the State that the amount seized may

belong to some other persons also and there is cloud regarding

ownership of the seized amount. The trial Court upon examining

- 5 -

the records has come to the conclusion that there is a cloud

regarding ownership of the seized amount and in the absence of

the petitioner being able to establish her ownership to the tune of

Rs.4,00,000/- from the seized amount, it is difficult to release the

same in favour of the petitioner. On the said ground, the

application has been rejected. For a relief under Section 457

Cr.P.C.,