Veerabhadra. G vs. State Of Karnataka

Facts

The petitioner, Veerabhadra G, is an auditor accused of criminal breach of trust and misappropriation. The prosecution alleges that the complainant paid the petitioner Rs.1,23,25,200/- between 2018-2019 and December 2021-2022. Despite these payments, the complainant received notices from the GST Department for non-payment of tax. Upon verification, it was discovered that the petitioner allegedly misappropriated the funds. The petitioner was in custody from May 23, 2022. The dispute involves the nature of payments, with the petitioner claiming some were cash payments and others related to investment repayment, while the State asserts the entire amount was paid via transfer and cash, and needs to be recovered.

Held

The Court rejected the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The Court found that a specific allegation of misappropriation of funds to the tune of Rs.1,23,25,200/- was made against the petitioner, who was acting as the complainant's auditor. The Court noted that while the petitioner disputed the nature of some payments and claimed repayment of investments, no documentary evidence was placed before the Court to substantiate these claims. Given the serious allegation of misappropriation and the lack of substantiating evidence from the petitioner, the Court deemed it inappropriate to exercise its powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner until the investigation is completed. However, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court again after the filing of the charge sheet.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.78/2022 of Indiranagar Police Station for offences under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contends that a significant portion of the alleged amount was paid in cash, and the documentary evidence presented by the prosecution only covers Rs.57,86,200/- and Rs.55,000/-. The petitioner claims to have been in custody since May 23, 2022, and argues that further investigation is not necessary, thus warranting bail. The petitioner also disputes that the amounts were payable towards GST, suggesting they were repayments of investment. Respondent's (State) Arguments: The State argues that the petitioner committed criminal breach of trust to the tune of Rs.1,23,25,200/-, with payments made through transfers, UPI, and cash amounting to Rs.64,84,000/-. The State asserts that the cash amount needs to be recovered and the petitioner's presence is required for further investigation, establishing a prima facie case against the petitioner.