High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Ex-Regional Head in Rs. 17 Crore Loan Fraud Case — Petitioner Not Named in FIR and No Prima Facie Case of Criminal Breach of Trust Made Out

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 119
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Sri Mohammad Asmathulla, former Regional Head of CGRCML Company, filed a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.326/2020 registered at Rural Police Station, Davanagere. The case involved allegations that the petitioner, along with other accused (employees of UCO Bank), defrauded farmers by promising loans of Rs.5 lakhs each and subsidies of Rs.2 lakhs each, ultimately collecting Rs.17 crores from Vinve Agri Traders, Hyderabad. The complainant and 35 other farmers were induced to provide revenue records and other documents. The petitioner was not named in the FIR and was only implicated as accused No.6 based on his role as Regional Head. The court heard arguments from both sides. The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner had no direct involvement and was not named in the FIR, while the State opposed bail citing the gravity of the offence. The court analyzed that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and no specific overt act was attributed to him. The court held that no prima facie case of criminal breach of trust or cheating was made out against the petitioner. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions including executing a personal bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, cooperating with investigation, not tampering with evidence, and appearing before the investigating officer as required.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Prima Facie Case - Petitioner, ex-Regional Head of a company, sought anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged cheating of farmers of Rs.17 crores - Court held that since the petitioner was not named in the FIR and no specific overt act was attributed, no prima facie case of criminal breach of trust or cheating was made out against him - Bail granted with conditions (Paras 1-6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of CrPC in connection with Crime No.326/2020 registered for offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of IPC.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Petition allowed. Petitioner granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions: executing a personal bond of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties, cooperating with investigation, not tampering with evidence, and appearing before the investigating officer as required.

Law Points

  • Anticipatory bail
  • Prima facie case
  • Criminal breach of trust
  • Cheating
  • Forgery
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Section 406 IPC
  • Section 409 IPC
  • Section 420 IPC
  • Section 465 IPC
  • Section 468 IPC
  • Section 471 IPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (KAR) (08) 43

CRL.P No. 6468 of 2023

2023-08-22

S Rachaiah

NC: 2023:KHC:29936

Sri. Hareesh Bhandary T, Sri. Rahul Rai K

Sri. Mohammad Asmathulla

State of Karnataka

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought enlargement on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.326/2020

Filing Reason

Petitioner apprehended arrest in connection with a case registered for offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of IPC

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and no specific overt act was attributed to him State opposed bail citing the gravity of the offence and the amount involved

Ratio Decidendi

Since the petitioner was not named in the FIR and no specific overt act was attributed to him, no prima facie case of criminal breach of trust or cheating was made out against him, entitling him to anticipatory bail.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard Sri.Hareesh Bhandary.T, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Rahul Rai.K, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. The petitioner stated to be the Regional Head of CGRCML Company. It is the case of the complainant that, the accused Nos.1 to 5 are the employees of UCO Bank. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and no specific overt act is attributed to him. Hence, I am of the considered opinion that, no prima facie case of criminal breach of trust or cheating is made out against the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is allowed.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a criminal petition under Section 438 CrPC before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.326/2020 registered at Rural Police Station, Davanagere. The petition was heard on 22nd August 2023 and allowed on the same day.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 438
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 34
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Ex-Regional Head in Rs. 17 Crore Loan Fraud Case — Petitioner Not Named in FIR and No Prima Facie Case of Criminal Breach of Trust Made Out
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Wife's Appeal in Family Court Execution Matter — Settlement Agreement for Transfer of Flat to Wife and Son Must Be Enforced. Court holds that a consent term in a divorce settlement requiring transfer of a flat to the wife and s...