SYED FARHAT ALI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition is filed seeking quashing of the order dated 10.9.2013 passed by the learned JMFC, Manvi in CC No. 456/2009 which was confirmed in the order dated 10.12.2013 by the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Raichur in Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 70/2013, pertaining to the petitioner and permit the petitioner to operate Account No. 18760 with the Corporation Bank, Raichur Branch by revoking the frozen account.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent and perused the records. The undisputed facts are that:

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has approached the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Raichur in Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 70/2013, and the said Revision Petition also came to be dismissed on the ground that the witnesses to the prosecution witnesses i.e., C.Ws. 4, 5 and 6 have stated that they have actually deposited the said amount in the account of the petitioner from their account, out of the amount paid to them by KHB, having purchased the land from the complainant and C.Ws. 4 to 6. But the Trial Court and the Revisional Court have come to the conclusion that the complainant and C.Ws. 4 to 6 are very poor persons and there is some suspicion as to why they have to deposit the said amount in the account of the accused persons. Therefore, as alleged whether there was any cheating or whether there was any breach of trust on the part of A6 has to be thrashed out during the course of full dressed trial. Therefore, the Revisional Court has also dismissed the said Revision Petition.