Shashank Keshav Kalkar v. The State Of Telangana

[ 3158 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAB 1HE TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINETEEN :PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4045 OF 2019 Between:

Shashank Keshav Kalkar, S/o. Keshav Kalkar @ Kasav Kalkar Petitioner/Accused No.2 AND The State of Telangana, Rep,its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad RespondenUComplainant , 4i8 € Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in the Criminal Petition, the Hrgh Coufi may be pleased to direct the SHO PSCCS Team -l Hyderabad or any other arrestrng officer to release the petitioner/accused no.2 on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.9'l of 20'1 8 in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner :SRl PRADEEP KUMAR SRIRAMBHATLA Counsel for the Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

ORDER

T:{E HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI ,IRIMINAL PETITION No. 4O45 of 2oI9 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the petitioner /A.2, for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No 91 of 2018 of CCS Poiice Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506 of IPC. 2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/A.2, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State and perused the record.

3.

The :rief facts of the prosecution case are that the accused proposed to purchase the property of the complainant by creating equitable mortgage of the said property with their bankers for grant of loan for expansion of their industry. On release of the loan amount, the accused will get the property registered by way of sale deed after paying the sale consideration. A. 1 represented by the then Director issued certain cheques to the complainant. After sanctioning the loan, the equitable mortgage was created by depositing the title deed pertaining to the complainant properties. During the tenure of loan being sanctioned, the Director Prashant Gangaram expired. A.2 requested not to deposit any cheques till the end of December 2015 and promised to pay the same before the finai date. In the meanwhile, A.2 had paid an amount of Rs.50,O0,O0O/- and thereafter the accused company is avoiding to pay the balance amount zrs per the agreed cheque amounts. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire case of the prosecution is false and misrepresentation of facts. The petitioner is innocent and falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is one of the

Directors of A.1's company and day-to-day activities of the company are being looked after by the then Director Sri Prashanth Gangaram Desai at the time of alleged transaction and thereafter he died. Thc de facto complainant, who was one of the Directors of accused company, had already filed a private complaint for dishonour of cheques wherein he alleged that the disputed cheques were issued in connection with the said transaction. Th.e de facto complainant actively participated in the affairs of the company and subsequently he resigned from the board of company and presented the signed company cheques against the petitioner and other accused to settle his o1d scores and to make some illegal gain. He further submits that as the alleged property is still under mortgage with the bank, the question of issuing cheques for purchase of the said property does not arise. The petitioner is permanent resident of Mumbai and is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by the Court. 5.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed to grant bail to the petitioner/A.2. 6.

Having regard to the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner/A.2, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him on some conditions.

7 .

Accordingly, the petitioner / A.2 is directed to surrender before the Station House Ofiicer, CCS Police Station, Hyderabad, within a period of 15 days from the date of this order. On such surrender, the said Station House Ofiicer shall release the petitioner lA.2 on bail, on his executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to his satisfaction. The petitioner/A.2 sha1l also abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., and shall cooperate with the investigating agency.

J In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed' I ,L SD/. T.RANGA BABU AS$ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// For ASSI EGISTRAR '&+ To, ll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderba).- The Station Hcuse Officer, C.C.S, Team-I, Hyderabad. One CC to SRI PRADEEP KUIVIAR SRIRAIVIBHATLA Advocate loPUCl

4. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court at Hyderabad. lourl

5. One Spare Ccpy aJ GR I

I HIGH"COURT GSDJ DATED:2310712019

ORDER

CRLP.No.4045 of 2019 irir\ rr "-$- i\ ,.S ,Qil BAIL