IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 8t DAY OF APRIL. 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10476/20 11 BLIAVEEX Sri. Balder Singh Deval S/o.Prem Singh Age: 45 years, 0cc: Business R/o. Patesh Nagar near RNS Tiles Factory Hubli PETITIONER (By Sri. M. Kusumakar, Adv.) AND The State of Karnataka By Yellapur Police Station, Yellapur Reptd by SPP RESPONDENT (By Sri. Anancikumar K. Navaigirnath, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 CR.PC. SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN YELLAPUR P.S. CRIME NO.180/2010 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE JMFC COURT, YELLAPUR WITH THE DIRECTION TO THE POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF PETITIONER’S ARREST. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail apprehending arrest by the police in connection with Crime No.180/2010 in respect of the offences punishable under Section 406 and 420 R/w Section 34 of IPC. 2. The complaint allegations in short are that the complainant purchased two lorries by taking loan from Tata Finance, Hubli and he was using the said lorries for transporting manganese and he was about to sell the two vehicles, On knowing this, accused Nos. 1 and 2 approached the said complainant and purchased the two lorries and agreed to pay the amount by way of installments. Een after taking the two vehicles, the said accused did not pay the amount and on the other hand, they told the complainant that they had handed over the vehicles to accused Nos. 3 and 4 on the same conditions. 3. It is on the aforesaid complaint allegations that a case was registered. The petitioner herein is the owner of accused No.4, the driver. As accused No.4 has been involved in the case by the police, the petitioner also apprehends that he may be arrested, as the police are inquiring with the petitioner by coming to his house. 4. On the other hand, submission of Sri. Anand IKumar Navalgimath, learned High Court Government Pleader is that, no case is registered against this petitioner and merely because police made some inquiries xvith him itself is not a ground to seek anticipatory bail and therefore, the apprehension of the petitioner is ill-founded and therefore, petition be rejected. 3 5. Having thus heard both sides and taking note of the nature of the complaint allegations and the learned Counsel for the petitioner also placing the order passed in Criminal Misc. Case No.58/2011 by the trial Court, wherein in the case of like nature anticipatory bail was granted, and as the petitioner apprehends that he can be arrested and the wife of the petitioner also having filed an affidavit before the trial Court stating that the police are visiting the house of the petitioner, taking all these factors into account, this petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail as he has got the apprehension of being arrested in connection with aforementioned case. 6. In the result, the petition is allowed subject to following conditions: i. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond for Rs.50.000/- with two sureties for the it 5 likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting police officer. ii. He shall assist the police in the investigation and shall co-operate with them. Sd/a JUDGE gab 9