ROHIT SHETTY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Chargesheet was filed in Crime No.90/2013 alleging that the accused in furtherence of common intention to commit theft, opened the door of the house of Smt.Munawara and after breaking open the lock, committed theft of gold ornaments worth Rs.30,00,000.00 and the accused in turn pledged the stolen gold ornaments with the Respondent No.2-Bank and obtained a loan. The loan which was disbursed was distributed amongst Accused Nos.2 and 3. The learned Magistrate accepted the chargesheet for the offences punishable under Ss. 3 406 and 420 read with Sec. 34 of IPC. Taking exception to the same, Accused No.2 is before this Court.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been acquitted by the learned Magistrate for the offence of theft said to have been committed in the house of Smt.Munawara and the chargesheet is filed only on the basis of statement of co-accused, viz., Accused No.1 and in the absence of corroborative material, the chargesheet filed against the petitioner is without any substance.

(3.) On the other hand, learned HCGP appearing for the State submits that the chargesheet material clearly discloses that the money which was disbursed by the Respondent No.2-Bank was disbursed to Accused No.1 was distributed amongst Accused Nos.1 to 3 with an intention to defraud the Bank. Hence, he submits that the chargesheet material clearly discloses the commission of offences alleged against the petitioners and same does not call for any interference.