IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1730/2019 BETWEEN:
Mahabaleshwar Hegde S/o late Ganesh Hedge Aged about 59 years, District Manager, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Development Corporation, Rajajinagar, Bangalore, R/at No.582/A, 7th Main, 6th Cross, 11th Block, Nagarabhavi, Bengaluru.
(By Sri.Mohammed Faruke , Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, Kolar Town Police Station, Rep by SPP High Court Building, High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore-560 001.
(By Sri.Honappa, HCGP) …Petitioner …Respondent 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 Cr.No.200/2018 of Kolar Town Police Station, Kolar for the offence p/u/s, 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 473 r/w Sec.34 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 for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent-State and perused the First Information Report.
2. It is alleged by the complainant that there was a meeting headed by Chief Secretary to the Government and also Secretary to the Social Welfare Department, in that, they have verified the loan applications and entrusted the work to give loan to the eligible persons to the District Manager, Kolar and released totally a sum of Rs.17,48,00,000/-, under Karnataka State Safai Karmachari Development Scheme on 21.02.2018, 5.03.2018 and 09.03.2018, 3. The petitioner being the Managing Director, alleged to have misused the said amount by releasing the said amount to the persons who are not eligible under the scheme by means of forging the documents in the name of totally 232 persons and misappropriated Government funds to the tune of Rs.2,42,00,000/- for his benefit and thereby, he has committed wrongful gain of the said amount. Complainant has alleged that the petitioner has forged many number of documents in this regard.
4. In the above said circumstances, in my opinion the custodial investigation is absolutely necessary in this case. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail, particularly anticipatory bail. Hence, petition deserves to be dismissed.
Accordingly, petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE SB