IN THE HIGH comm' OF KARNATAKEL , '
CIRCUIT BENCH AT.3HARw.§§ ' :5» % V
DATED THIS THE 27"! DAY 63
V' A A 'V 1
THE HoN'BL_E MR.JU§'FiCE.._V1$I.ALi§A-N§Z)A_E
CREMINALV Pi';'i'1Ti:Ql§?w:.
BETWEEN: Q
Panchakshaxa
S/o.VceI13h;ad1:_a"3zyéa"'-'.V__ K "
Aged about -33 yeags «. A
R] o.Viv::kaz.1;ai1:1 N .Gangav'at11i Taluk
Koppah _ _' ...Petin'.oncr
(By Sri shivaraj Pam, W;
AND: . V 1 "
State of "
Rep'; by its'S;.i"-'..F.""
High. Cimzxit Be__nch
-
. . . Respondent
L ” ‘-…{By SI§’?s#andv.K.’i§1§gaaiI:;eaJgimath, I-ICGP)
This petition is filed under section 438
“{3r;’P,C. to release the pefitioner on bail in the event
‘[_”of_ Racing arrested by the Sub-urban police Hubli, in Crime
“z~:o.255/2003 pending in the JMFC 11 Court at Hubli, by
~a;<_::€x:ptia:1g surety or on any conditions that this Horfblc
V Tflgiuninay be phased to impose and pass appropriate orders
"– midst the circumstances of the case.
"made the following.-
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court
The petitioner was one of V
Karnataka Agra Farm Privatg. 1,imi£ec1% whichTV ,
huge amounts as deposits B35: ;r$n’ous
schemes under difiextnfi j
“Amaxjyothi”, “saxvodayeé deposits from
public, the On
maturity, me’ Q?! to the public.
Therefore-.~,~—Vth’§c:’ reghtemd a case in
C1imcl\Vi¥<;y.2.E$S/Vf¢V2,(:}vi1'S;..L::M = %
I l3;éivc_:'11aa.1fiA"'t1§é..£camed Counsel appeam g Ear
V' '-the Government Plcader for the State.
A ._ Counsel for the petitioner would submit
_ thatj;~etitiéiac1;"had resigned from. the post of Dimctor of the
Way back in the year 2005. Therefore, he was
with the a&irs of the Company. In these
% cimiumsianocs, the petitioner cannot be arrested and sent to
4. The learned Government Advocate would _
bail application by contending that petiti_<mer.:
Directors having floated Various Sehemee} A'
fiom public by assuring
Subsequently, they did not " up The
petitioner is required forithe puhgpot. jg;
5. On ca:efuIV_consi€ierae.i§onAof dioenments and the
objection Government
Advocatefii petitioner that he has
zesignedfl’, fmm long before the proceedings
were he decided during the course of
The :Co3:mse1 would submit that petitioner
V. amount to the compIa1nan’ t.
In petition, we are concerned with allegations
, _ (KW
hgtnade afiejnet petitioner and the offences “against him.
L/
V’ ‘C_”:”.1;AA1ei’e:*.To1e, the willingness of the petitioner to pay to the
‘ the amount deposited by him, cannot be taken
” consideration to grant the direction as prayeci for.
Considering the nature and magnitude of the case, ljam of
tlm opinion that custodial interrogation catmct be denicjgd to
the investigating omcer. Therefore, the
cnfitled to a direction under Sec.438 Cr.P.C.
7. For these reasons, the pctitiéfi djsm1s; ‘
I138 .