GOVINDARAJU Vs. PRATHIMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is filed in the wake of cancellation of bail, granted vide order dated 15.10.2013, by the court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, by the impugned order dated 31.7.2014, passed by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, which is under challenge herein.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case as alleged are that the present petitioner Govindaraju is known to the complainant, Prathima and her husband. It is said that there was an agreement, under which the petitioner and his wife were to construct a house for Prathima and her family. The cost of construction was said to be Rs. 18 lakh. Prathima and her husband are said to have paid a sum of Rs. 15.30 lakh and there was an outstanding amount of Rs. 2.70 lakh, which was to be paid in consideration of the said agreement. There was said to be a delay in payment in spite of repeated demands.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned State Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent no. 1, the complainant seek to justify the order impugned.