BETWEEN 1.
Crl. P 5624/O9
{N TH 13: HIGH COURT OF KA.R1\.’=A’I”AKA AT L3ANGAI.QE~–‘lj3
DATIEZID “i’H’IS “i’HE 01.3′? DAY OF F’E?2I’:3RUARY gou
BEFORE A :uVH
THITS, HONBLE MR.Jus”1’1C1«:més.»I>Afi’1§§§”‘
CRiMiNAL PE’1″i’I’ION 1\:{3,5<3€2:::}2do.r:3_
Smt. Yamuria Kalyani,
W/0. Sri. P. Raju.
Aged about 48 year__S;”~._ _
No.10, 7*” ‘A’ Cross,” ‘ ‘
SH”. M.V. Nagar. ‘ _
Raman1Lzrt.hy Nagafi’ * V’
BangaI01’§3 016. §
Sim. M. Ga{ya£:h’x’i_ ”
D/’Q. 1\’1_aCii”:2121′;.i”«. _.
Ageduabszmt 43 ‘y<: aufs';'—. '
No.525;.,'Sa1m:upa',*:~»% Biocrk.
J7"? Cross, RIF. Nagar.
iore –“E3r6.Q..O32.
‘ ~ gamh Babu,
Aged”«£;bQuiv38 years.
“MS/0. Si’; E3. Madhavan.
N0_;2E*}., 3*” Cross. MA/.Naga1′._
Rafi1an’1’L11’ihy Nagar.
n j [3Ei1′.1§.§Ei§()FE’ ~ 560 016.
V’ = Vijayal.
Aged aboui, 55 years.
D/0. Shri. KT. Sundarraj.
3 CH. P 5624/O9
No.10. K:.:vc:mpL: Road.
K<)1.1"12'mL.1:', Bmlgz;-1I 1′
[Sn’. Ashe}: Haranahalii Assis. Ad}/s.}
aa<s:=a<»g
This Criminai Pezitibniis 11Ti_i6ffi }L1§'id§r. Si:QEio11 482 Cr.P.C
praying to quash 58.30.2009 in
Spl.C.C.N{). 1 123/:2oA(j;4;1-.pe1£g:1mgflan -Lige the XX.I~Addl. City
Civil <81 __L.%L1{igcr for ("X31 cases.
Bangaiore Cit.vy:..V
'i'hiS._Ci*imir1aI ~.F..'V"t:';3L.l'1'i'O4IV1 '*:';'(J!!r;"_J_ing on for Admission. this day.
the Court nizide
_____ ..Q1S_DE
~ 'pet§fi0x} is filed for quashing the order dated
0$2009"i:{."$.p1;;?.iC No.2 I8/2004 })a:~ssc'3d by the xx: Addi. City
Civii zifzd "Ses'€io11s Judge: and -Spatial J11cige for CB} C'.ases.._
x V "B,;1r1g.a10re."'
2. The case was registered against. the pet:i£.im1ers and
.__ 0ther accused for the offence punishable under Sections 12043
04
3 Crl. $3 5624/{)9
readwith 420. 468. 471. ‘~’}77(A) IPC 2:u”1<'1 Se<""1i011 13 (2). [Ci]
of the Prev'e1'h1E,io1'1 01' C0rrL.1pti()1'1 Am". The pet
Accused No.3 1.0 5 and 7 belore the Court below.–'.701LéV1*e::\*e§1's V'
'dCCL£S'c11iOl'1 against. the pe1.iEi0ne:'s 1h.a't'"'~hey
the criminal conspiracy alongwith
are the Managers of Bank of 0 2
3. The Accused N082} ‘c1V_I’Td-.2″-h;c1d filect”a:.1 afjpiicatioli
assailing the validity of the £?.z:*.’1==.(.:”:.i_(V)ft’1 ‘;’;)1’C§’€{:”‘ e1hC3_t.11ei1* app1.1’eat1’on
cranele 10 be 1″ejee1.e;;f’by 1.f1::%W(i{.2’:.1.1:ji it u1he1’eaf1.er that the
petitioners wh0″‘a1*éi.V_VA¥:eL1se_d”..I\E<):s;3v..'E.<) E: and 7 s511I:)1'1'1it:1.ec1 an
21pp1i(1a1i0'1imi'u::jheif':f%:i'i'seh~3.i'ge 0h"'8.0t0.2009 1'1ar:'a1'.ing ail the
{acts ar1d*_the_. 1*eaS0f1'-3. é1s_."m_":;j.h0w that there is no material
agaisnt. 1;hei1'1–,f0rV theA'..Vei'.1'Eegatio:1s made in respect oi' the
e0nsVpi'i?aC};/. Ieé1"r1<1.e_d. Sp}. Judge vide orcier dated 8.10.2009
"._V1'c,{i§_e.i'V<-id –';,htr~.apg51'i(je11.i01'1 amd passed the order z-us lli'1dE'1'2
'V ' u–""f'A.,;)VAj;1'-..lVie.e;1{'.ion filed on beha1I'o%' I{es[i)01":cie11ts
Fiied 21%. a highky be1z1E.e(.1 :.s1,;1g.;e is
ciiEs:,1_{i'ssed in View of the orcier }.)e'.1.~3seci by ihis
;0"C'0Lli'1. 011 5.9.2009 for I"1"211'11l1"1g c':1'1arge atgaziaiet.
Aecuseci N03} to 7. Charge by 22. £02009."
aZ_
4 Cr]. P 5624/09
4. 1:’ {his order \-Vhi{.’h has been (’11;-‘1l1e11;2;ec:E i3e.f()1′(:* Ehis
Couri.
5. 1 have heard the learned emmnsek for £1’_1é5j _
and also the counsel for the resp0n.den’L:3.
6. It is relevant to note
W85 passed by the Trial COE1£’fi//V§.I\x–.,,1.h€.0€1f3b1iiT??’1Ii:g1′;i”0917″-A,(3E?;US€d’~ 0
Nos} and 2 challengillg ivhuc: gfalited for
prosecutiml of the 021:’-;e.V :’0?gfic;’1.;1’c:iV;.=,%””v«3.%v;.a.s”;~.e_jeeteC] vide order
dated 5.9.2009. E’-Ext filed an
application on the grounds
mentioned 1 ~ dated 7.10.2009. The said
appiicatiod vIf1.i.I”2’S 16 paras narrating the
facts and alsoddthe V1*e”aso£1s as to why they have requested for
}’3VL;Af._ un1’01’1una1ely. the learned S€.’SSi()1′]S JL1dg_._>;e
se=..’aVU;ngthe.;1pplic:a1.io11 has been filed at a belated
andAL1_ v’iew~ Qff..:’.he order dated 5.9.2009 has dismissed Ehe said
0′ -w__&»§)pli(:a1,iop}
7. The rnatter was not posted for the objections of the
“,:VVO'[‘hf”3I’ side. There was no hearing on the :«.ipf)h(‘.E1tlOI1. No
5;,
1’ee1soVi”1ab1e’iopfzrirtunity to the pziriies.
(T1. 2’ 5624/09
‘Jk
reasons ha»-‘e been assi med bv the Tria-11 Court in I'{“_”€'(TT,.1..I’}=F5 the
\._ V I C?
application except stating that if is at 21 belated the
reference of the order dated 5.9.2009 which has ii.e;«;.i.ié;
the applic:at.ion filed by the peiiiioiiers.'””‘.i7i”ie saiid _or_i:ier_
to the validity of the sarietion, but thepezitiionei*s._’ha.d
application for dis(:harge zmd such .g:ir:’:i,1msifaiiiees’, the
i1’1e1pug:ied order 1’10’: ii..E5}’)f;?é’11f«,iE-igi.’Vi}l’d<;fif. a:'ici'i;.:–..§i.a§bie to be
quashed. In the (?iI'{'.LlI1'1S"{v..';1a'I":i:'T"€7£s.,' ii. the following:
The pexiogn "§:ié;{ec1 8.10.2009 is set
aside. The the Court below with a
directionjto give"i'a:1..__o'pp0:{tinity to the responderit. to file the
cibjecétioim 's§:aie;11e1'i.1 E7;~Ii(L§ _ {o._h'e211' the Siziilit? zmd to dispose of
the a;)piiV<':aiio'n" iii' d('3(.'()Fdé}1'](.'.(.' wiih law. 2-iiiei' giving
Sd/-
JUDGE