IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 201I DAY OF APRIL, 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRL.P,N0.10600/201 I Between: H.S.Umesh S/o.H.N.Srikantavva, Age 54 years, 0cc.: Employee in SBM, Haven, R/o.: Vidyanagar, Tq. & Dist.: Haven, Petitioner (By Sri. Laxman T. Mantagani. Advocate) And: State of IKarnataka. By PSI Town Police, Haven. District Haven. Respondent (By Sri .Anand K. Navalgirnath, HCGP) This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge the petitioner herein on bail in the event of his arrest for a case registered in Haven Town P.S. in Crime No.22/2011 for the offences p/u/s.406. 409 & 420 of IPC. This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: oRDER Heard petitioner’s counsel Sri.Laxrnan T.Mantagani and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the S -2- respondent-State in respect of the bail sought by the petitioner. 2. In the complaint, the allegations are that one Shivayogi, a customer of the S.B.M. Bank gave a complaint stating that though he has not withdrawn the amount of Rs.5,000/- which was deposited to his account and though he deposited Rs.6,000/- on 14.12.2010 and another Rs.5000/- on 08.11.2010. but the said amounts were not given credit to the said account and the petitioner had misutilised the amount of the bank for his own purpose and no entry was made in respect of the amounts received from the above mentioned customer. Therefore, a case was registered under Sections 406, 409, 420 of the IPC. 3. Having regard to the nature of the complaint allegations it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner as tampering of evidence and also the investigation is likely. Accordingly petition is rejected. 3d!- VTLp* JUDGE