IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6494/2018 BETWEEN:
B.S.Jagadish, Aged about 56 years, Assistant Director, Taluk Social Welfare Office, Kolar – 563101. ...Petitioner (By Smt.Leena Sridhar, Advocate for Sri.H.V.Manjunath, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, Rep. by SPP, For Anti-Corruption Bureau Kolar, Kolar – 563101. ... Respondent (By Sri.Jagadeesha.B.N, Spl.P.P) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.07/2018 of Anti- Corruption Bureau, Kolar for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c) read with 13(2) of P.C Act and Sections 120B, 409, 420, 468, 471 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying this Court to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.07/2018 of A.C.B Police Station, Kolar for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c) read with 13(2) of PC Act, 1988 and under Sections 120(B), 409, 420, 468, 471 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Smt.Leena Sridhar and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for respondent - ACB.
3. Gist of the complaint is that accused Nos.1 to 3 conspired with accused No.4 and have misappropriated an amount of Rs.59,26,186/- in the matter of supplying the materials required for general hostels in the district.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of the registration of the complaint the accused/petitioner apprehends that he may be arrested at any point of time and in the event of his arrest, he will be ill-treated and harassed.
5. It is the submission of the learned Special Public Prosecutor that if the accused/petitioner co-operate with the investigation, they will not apprehend him and there is no apprehension of him being arrested. When the Special Public Prosecutor submits that if the accused/petitioner co-operate with the investigation he is not going to be arrested. Then under such circumstances, I feel that the petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C to grant relief of anticipatory bail in the event of arrest does not survive for consideration. In the light of the submissions made by the learned Special Public Prosecutor, it has been observed that even if the anticipatory bail is granted, it is the duty of the accused/petitioner to co-operate with the investigation officer to complete the process of investigation. Anticipatory bail will not provide any shield to the accused/petitioner to avoid their appearance before the Investigating Officer. Since, it is made very clear that the accused/petitioner will not be arrested, I do not see that there is any need to grant anticipatory bail. Anticipatory bail can be granted only when there is apprehension of arrest. Under the said facts and circumstances, with the above observations, this petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE NS