Rahul Malani v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.6429 of 2017 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed, by the petitioners/A.2 to A.4, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.217 of 2017 on the file of the Station House Officer, Pattancheru Police Station, Sangareddy, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 r/w 34 of IPC.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were falsely implicated in this case by the father of the de-facto complainant who is highly influential person in the society. He submitted that even if the allegations made in the complaint are, ex facie, taken to be true and correct, no prima facie case is made out against the petitioners, therefore, this is a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is still in progress, therefore, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners herein induced the de-facto complainant by making false promise to invest an amount of Rs.3,45,000/- in the company by name Q-Net started by them. Believing the words of the petitioners, the de-facto complainant transferred an amount of Rs.3,45,000/- to the bank account of the accused No.1. The gist of the allegations made in the complaint is that the petitioners cheated the defacto complainant. The petitioners filed Crl.M.P.No.600 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for Trial of offences under Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989-cum-V Additional Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy under Section 438 Cr.P.C and the same was dismissed on 07.07.2017.

A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioners being known persons to the de-facto complainant, he transferred an amount of Rs.3,45,000/- to the bank account of the accused No.1. The Crl.P.No.4513 of 2017 filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioners was dismissed by this Court on 16.6.2017. A perusal of the record prima facie reveals the role played by the petitioners in commission of the offence. Taking into consideration the nature of the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioners as well as the stage of investigation, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case to grant pre arrest bail to the petitioners.

In the result, the petition is dismissed.

_________________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J Date: August 28, 2017 Kvsn