IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9630 OF 2018 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9621 OF 2018 IN CRL.P.NO.9630/2018 BETWEEN:
KUMAR S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT GUDDATTI VILLAGE ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT – 562 106 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI K.S.VISHWANATH, ADV.) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BENGALURU ACB, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU – 560 066 REP. BY SPL.P.P.
BENGALURU – 560 001 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, SPL.P.P.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.12/2018 OF RESPONDENT ACB BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 7(a) OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT.
IN CRL.P.NO.9621/2018 BETWEEN:
SRI THIMMA REDDY S/O CHANNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS SENIOR SUB REGISTRAR ATTIBELE SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE TALUK OFFICE, ANEKAL BENGALURU – 562 106 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI ASHOK HARNAHALLI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI N.S.SANJAY GOWDA, ADV.) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU BENGALURU DISTRICT BENGALURU REP. BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT BENGALURU – 560 001 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, SPL.P.P.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.12/2018 BANGALORE, ACB, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 7(a) OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.12/2018 of Anti Corruption Bureau, Bengaluru Rural District. The said case is registered against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 7A of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018.
2. Case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:
Accused No.1, who was the Senior Sub-Registrar of Attibele Sub-Registrar’s office, Anekal, demanded illegal gratification of Rs.2,00,000/- from the complainant for cancellation of registered Joint Development Agreement between the complainant and Sai Gagan Builders and Developers. In pursuance of such demand, on 14.12.2018, the first accused demanded and received illegal gratification of Rs.1.25 lakhs through the second accused. A trap was laid and the bait money was recovered under the mahazar.
3. The offence alleged against the petitioners carries punishment of imprisonment upto seven years and fine. The alleged demand though was by the first accused, recovery was not from him. Though the second accused said to have received the bait money, there were no allegations of demand against him.
4. It is submitted that the first accused is already kept under suspension. Therefore, the chance of he visiting the office and tampering the evidence is remote. The major part of the investigation is already concluded.
5. In Nimmagadda Prasad –vs- Central Bureau of Investigation (2013) 7 SCC 466, the judgment relied upon by the learned Special Public Prosecutor, it was held that while granting bail, the Court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, chances of tampering the witnesses, larger interests of the public, etc. In the said case, the corruption alleged was running into Rs.40,000 crores. The accused therein were holding highly influential positions. Therefore, the said judgment is not applicable to the facts of the present case.
6. Under these circumstances, these are the fit cases to grant bail with suitable conditions. Therefore, the petitions are allowed.
Petitioners are granted bail in Crime No.12/2018 of Anti Corruption Bureau, Bengaluru Rural District, subject to the following conditions:
1) The petitioners shall execute personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and furnish two sureties in the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for their appearance;
2) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer/Court as and when required for the purpose of investigation/trial;
3) They shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any manner;
4) Except for the purpose of investigation, the first accused/petitioner in Crl.P.No.9621/2018 shall not visit the scene of offence till completion of the investigation.
In view of disposal of the petitions, I.A.No.1/2018 filed in Crl.P.No.9621/2018 does not survive for consideration. Hence, it stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE KNM/-