IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7532/2017 BETWEEN:
K.SURESH S/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT NO.149 HIRANDAHALLI MAIN ROAD HIRANDAHALLI VILLAGE VIRGONAGAR POST BENGALURU – 560 049. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHARATH S. GOWDA, ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY B.M.T.F. POLICE STATION NR SQUARE BANGALORE CITY – 560 002 REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU – 560 001. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI S.VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.16/2017 OF BENGALURU METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 441 OF K.M.C. ACT AND SEC.120(B), 409, 420, 468, 471 AND 511 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioner is in judicial custody in Cr.No.16/2017 registered by the respondent-police in respect of the offences under section 441 of KMC Act and sections 120(B), 409, 420, 468, 471, 511 of IPC. He is arraigned as A-1 at column No.6 of the FIR.
3. The allegation is, a complaint was given to the respondent on 7.3.2017 by a private person alleging Transfer Development Right was illegally obtained in respect of Sy.No.4/2 of Kowdenahalli village, K.R.Puram Hobli, despite civil suit is pending. On that, the respondent conducted enquiry and found that, by furnishing concocted documents, the petitioner who is a TDR agent in connivance with the Asst. Engineer (A-2) has obtained the TDR and the FIR came to be registered on 28.8.2017.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, it is beyond the propriety of the respondent-police to conduct enquiry/investigation without registering the case in view of the judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1 in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner is in custody since 29.8.2017. The Investigating Officer has not sought for his police custody. He is a Panchayath Member of Bidarahalli Grama Panchayath. He undertakes to abide by any condition that may be imposed on him. A-2 is said to have been granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court.
5. Having regard to the circumstance, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing a self bond for Rs.1 lakh with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. He shall appear before the respondent-Investigating Officer as and when called upon during further course of investigation. He shall not tamper with the evidence.
Dvr:
Sd/- JUDGE