VENKATESH MURTHY T. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Sec. 439(2) of Cr.P.C praying this Court to cancel the bail granted in favour of respondent No.2/accused No.1 by the I/c I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala in Cr.No.459/2019 dtd. 5/5/2021 for the offences punishable under Sec. 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short 'IT Act ') and under Sec. 419 and 420 of IPC and sought for the arrest and commit him to custody.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1-State and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner/complainant Sri Venkatesh Murthy in the complaint made an allegation that he made the transaction with respondent No.2 to purchase the Bitcoins. Respondent No.2 represented himself as a Stock Broker dealing with Cryptocurrency, hence, the petitioner invested an amount of Rs.75.00 lakh with respondent No.2 in two accounts and respondent No.2 also started luring more people into Crypto Invest across India and in foreign countries like Singapore, Malaysia by offering big monthly returns and he launched Crypto Invest application in the Play store in April 2018 through which the transaction was carried on between the petitioner and respondent No.2. When the matter was under investigation, respondent No.2 was arrested and produced before the Trial Court and the learned Magistrate, enlarged him on bail coming to the conclusion that though the offence alleged against the accused No.1 is non-bailable but not punishable with death or life imprisonment and triable by the Court. The Investigating Officer has taken custody of the accused No.1 and it shows that he has completed almost of his investigation and also observed that the High Court of Karnataka has granted anticipatory bail to accused Nos.2 to 6 and it is also observed that respondent No.2/accused No.1 is suffering from COVID-19 disease and provided clause 437 of Cr.P.C and enlarged respondent No.2 on bail and hence, the present petition is filed to cancel the bail granted in favour of respondent No.2.