Dharanikota Sampath Kumar v. The State Of Telangana
HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.4080 of 2019 O R D E R :
This Criminal Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioner, who is A.1, seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.77 of 2019 of Meerpet Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 484 r/w. Section 34 of IPC and Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.
The case of the prosecution is that in the month of October, 2015, Accused No.2 was introduced to the complainant through SHADI.COM. and after knowing the savings of the complainant and her job, A.2 promised to marry her, but postponed the same stating that the complainant belongs to SC community, that both A.1 and A.2 conspired to extort huge money from the complainant and accordingly, she was forced to transfer Rs.10,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- on 02.10.2018 and 03.10.2018, respectively, to the account of the petitioner/A.1, apart from other costly articles, like iphone, Laptop Apple watch etc., thereby both the accused cheated her. Basing on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, the police registered Crime No.77 of 2019 for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner/A.1 and another accused.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/A.1 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State. Perused the material on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is no way concerned with the alleged offences and not having any acquaintance with the complainant at any point of time. It is also contended that the complainant never had any marriage proposal with his son/A.2 and never added as premium member in SHADI.COM. It is also contended that the defacto complainant has transferred the amounts to discharge her liability to A.2, as A.2 has arranged an amount of Rs.40,00,000/- to the friends of the complainant at her request. It is also contended that as the entire money transaction took place in USA, this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the present case.
It is also contended that the petitioner never demanded any money from the complainant and he never used any vulgar language against the complainant at any point of time. It is contended that investigation is in progress and the petitioner is ready to abide by any of the conditions imposed by this Court and would cooperate with the investigation, if he is released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the aforesaid crime.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the relief sought in the above petition.
As seen from the complaint of the defacto complainant, there are specific allegations made against the petitioner that the amounts of Rs.10,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- have been transferred on different dates from the account of the complainant into the account of the petitioner/A.1 and no plausible explanation whatsoever has been given by the petitioner as to why and for what purpose the said amounts have been transferred to his account from the account of the defacto complainant.
Therefore, by taking into consideration the nature of allegations and the gravity of offences alleged against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, this criminal petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________ JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI 24.07.2019.
Msr
HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.4080 of 2019 24.07.2019 Msr