LAWS(KAR)-2018-6-60

ANAND BALKRISHNA APPUGOL, CHAIRMAN SHREE KRANTIVEER SANGOLI RAYANNA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Vs. NANA DHONDIBA DESAI

Decided On June 20, 2018
Anand Balkrishna Appugol, Chairman Shree Krantiveer Sangoli Rayanna Co-Operative Society Limited Appellant
V/S
Nana Dhondiba Desai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth for brevity referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') seeking to quash the proceedings pending before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi (henceforth for brevity referred to as 'Special Court') in Special Case No.14 of 2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2004 (henceforth for brevity referred to as 'KPID Act').

(2.) The summary of the case which has lead the present petitioner to file this petition is that, the present petitioner is said to be the Chairman of Sri. Krantiveera Sangolli Rayanna Co-operative Society Ltd., a Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of Karnataka CoCRL. operative Societies Act, 1959 (henceforth for brevity referred to as 'KCS Act') and governed by the provisions of the said Act and bye-laws framed under it.

(3.) The present respondent, as a complainant, has filed a private complaint under Section 18 of KPID Act before the Special Court for the offence punishable under Sections 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the said Act alleging that the present petitioner, who is in charge of Krantiveera Sangolli Rayanna Credit Co-operative Society Ltd., and also Gajaraj Credit Cooperative Society has failed to refund a sum of '66, 27, 282/- to the various depositors who had deposited the said amount with the said Co-operative Societies. It is further alleged in the complaint that the present petitioner, who is the accused before the Special Court has invested the money of the depositors, collected by him, in real estate business said to have been run by him. Thus, he has cheated the general public/investors by misappropriation of the fund deposited by them. The Special Court took the cognizance of the said private complaint under Section 18 of the KPID Act and issued summons to the accused mentioned therein including the present petitioner. It is the said act of the Special Court in taking cognizance of the matter, the present petitioner has challenged with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings pending before the Special Court.