SRI VIKAS RAJ BHANSALI v. STATE BY KODIGEHALLI POLICE

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001. - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:17569 CRL.P No. 161 of 2024

2. MUKESH M BAGRECHA S/O JAIN MADANLAL AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS OLD NO. 153, NEW 72, VELLALA STREET, PURASWALKAM CHENNAI – 600 084. (BY SMT. N ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.07.2023 PASSED IN C.C.NO.25222/2018 BY VII ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU WHEREIN THE TRIAL COURT HAS ORDERED FOR ISSUANCE OF PROCLAMATION AGAINST THE ACCUSED/PETITIONER, ORDERED TO CONFISCATE THE MOVABLE AND IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES AND FORFEITED THE BAIL BOND AND SURETY AND DIRECTING TO REGISTER SEPARATE CRL. MISC. PETITION FOR RECOVERY OF BAIL BOND AMOUNT AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:17569 CRL.P No. 161 of 2024 ORDER

1. The petitioner has filed this criminal petition seeking to set aside the order dated 13.07.2023 passed in C.C. No.25222/2018 by the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru wherein the Trial Court issued proclamation against the petitioner and also issued order of attachment of movable and immovable properties.

2. The petitioner has been charge sheeted for the offences under Sections 418, 419, 420, 468, 471 r/w 511 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). After filing of the charge sheet, the Trial Court issued summons to the accused. The petitioner unavoidable circumstances could not attend the Court on 18.04.2022. The Trial Court issued NBW to the accused. Even after issuance of the NBW, as the respondent police did not secure the presence of the accused, consequently, the Trial Court issued proclamation against the accused on

06.03.2023. After issuance of the said proclamation order, the jurisdictional police returned the proclamation warrant along with panchanama and attachment order has been issued against the accused on 13.07.2023. The - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:17569 CRL.P No. 161 of 2024 jurisdictional police submitted a report stating that the accused had neither movable nor immovable properties in his name. After considering the said report, on

26.10.2023, the Trial Court ordered for forfeiture of bail bond and also directed to register a separate case against surety and accused for recovery of bond amount. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner approached this Court seeking to set aside the order dated 13.07.2023.

3. Heard Sri.D.Prabhakar, learned counsel for petitioner and Smt.N.Anitha Girish, learned HCGP for the respondent – State.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing of the charge sheet, due to unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner/accused did not approach the Trial Court. In the meantime, NBW has been issued against the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the Trial Court and he will abide the conditions henceforth without fail.

5. It is further submitted that the petitioner is having good case on merits. If the petitioner is not given an opportunity to defend his case, his right would be - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:17569 CRL.P No. 161 of 2024 defeated. Therefore, he may be given an opportunity to appear before the Trial Court by setting aside the order. Making such submission, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition and pass suitable orders as prayed for.

6. Per contra, learned HCGP vehemently opposed the said petition and submitted that the Trial Court has already passed an order to register a separate case as the petitioner was remained absent on several occasion after filing the charge sheet. The conditions imposed at the time of granting bail regarding appearance of the petitioner had also been violated. Therefore, he is not entitled for any relief. Making such submission, the learned HCGP for the respondent – State prays to dismiss the petition.

7. After having heard the learned counsel for petitioner, perused the order sheet, it appears that the Trial Court took cognizance of the said offences on 12.09.2018 and issued summons. The matter was adjourned to

12.11.2018 and on that day, he remained absent. Even on several dates of hearing, he remained absent. On - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:17569 CRL.P No. 161 of 2024

09.07.2019 an application for recall was filed and NBW issued against the accused was recalled. Again the matter was posted framing of charge. On

16.08.2019, charge has been framed. The accused after hearing the charge, claimed to be tried. On next date of hearing, i.e., on 25.09.2019 accused was absent and the exemption application was allowed. On 04.09.2020, the matter was referred to Lok Adalath. The proceedings of the Lok Adalath disclose that none of the parties were present, again it was remitted to the Court for regular stage. On 03.02.2022, accused was present and thereafter, he remained absent. On 06.03.2023, the Trial Court after considering the accused as proclaimed offender, issued proclamation against the accused. On

13.07.2023, attachment order has been issued against the accused as per Section 83 of Cr.P.C.

8. After having perused the order sheet, it appears that the accused sometimes present and sometimes was absent and exemption applications were being filed periodically by the counsel for the accused. Having considered the gravity of the offence and also the submission of learned - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:17569 CRL.P No. 161 of 2024 counsel for petitioner, it is appropriate to pass the order as prayed for.

9. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:- ORDER i) ii) The Criminal Petition is allowed- in-part. The order dated 13.07.2023 passed in C.C. No.25222/2018 by the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is set aside. iii) The petitioner is directed to appear before the Trial Court and file necessary application for recalling of NBW issued against him. On such application being filed, the Trial Court is at liberty to consider the said application liberally after having considered facts and circumstances of the case. Sd/- JUDGE UN,List No.: 2 Sl No.: 156