IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MAY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.2969/2019 c/w CRIMINAL PETITION No.2996/2019 In Criminal Petition No.2969/2019 BETWEEN:
Shabarish.V.S S/o Seva Kumar, Aged about 38 years, Police Inspector, Kengeri Traffic Police Station, Bengaluru – 560060.
Residing at Vaasthu Greens Apartment, Flat No.226, Uttarahalli Main Road, Kodipalya, Kengeri, Bengaluru – 560060.
Permanent address # 1156, R.H.Road, Bangarpet, Kolar District – 563114. ... Petitioner (By Sri. Hasmath Pasha, Sr. Advocate for Sri.M.Shashidhara, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By Police Inspector, Anti Corruption Bureau, Bengaluru – 560001. ... Respondent (By Sri. B.M.Jagadeesha, Spl.P.P) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.12/2019 of Anti Corruption Bureau, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 7(a)(A), 12 of Anti Corruption Act.
In Criminal Petition No.2996/2019 BETWEEN:
Hulluraiah, S/o Late Chikkaiah, Aged about 68 years, Retired Service, Resident of No.676/A, 17th Main, 1st Block, III Phase, Manjunathnagar, Bengaluru – 560010.
Permanent Resident Kodihallipalya Village, Kottagere Hobli, Kunigal Taluk, Tumkur District – 572130. ... Petitioner (By Sri. P. Prasanna Kumar, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By Anti Corruption Bureau, Bengaluru City Station, Bengaluru.
Represented by its Special Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Dr.BR Ambedkar Veedhi, Bengaluru – 560001. ... Respondent (By Sri. Venkatesh. P. Dalwai, Spl.P.P) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.12/2019 of Anti Corruption Bureau Police, Bengaluru City for the offences punishable under Section 7(a), Section 7-A and Section 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
These Criminal Petitions coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petition filed by accused No.1 in Criminal Petition No.2969/2019 is clubbed along with Criminal Petition No.2996/2019 filed by accused No.2 and as the factual matrix remains the same, matters are taken up for consideration together.
2. The petitioners have filed the petitions under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with their detention in proceedings in crime No.12/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 7(a), 17(A) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 which is pending on the file of XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru.
3. It is stated that Rajesh.M.S who is a real estate businessmen, has sold his property to one Sudarshan and others. It is stated that vendees had approached the complainant to return their sale proceeds and to take back the property that was sold, with respect to which proposal it is stated that the complainant declined. It is further stated that accused No.1, who was a Police Inspector has in collusion with the vendee threatened the complainant to settle the matter and had committed the offences that are made out.
4. It is stated that the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.2969/2019 was the Police Inspector attached to the Magadi Police Station and the complainant was stated to have been taken to Magadi Police Station by the petitioner and his staff. It is further stated that the complainant was threatened with launch of criminal proceedings if he did not settle the dispute and return the sale proceeds. It is further stated that the petitioner/accused No.1 was frequently telephonically calling the complainant and threatening him of filing a false case if dispute was not settled.
5. It is further stated that the petitioner was transferred subsequently to the Kengeri Traffic Police Station even after which it is stated that he continued to call the complainant forcing the complainant to settle the issue.
6. It comes out from the facts that on 19.03.2019, accused No.2 who was known to accused No.1 called the complainant to a hotel and in the presence of accused No.1, accused No.2 demanded payment of Rs.5 lakhs to him and Rs.10 lakhs to be paid to accused No.1 to settle the matter.
7. It is stated that subsequently the complainant had approached the Deputy Superintendent of Police, ACB Police and lodged a complaint and the ACB Police have registered a case in crime No.12/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 7(a), 17(A) and 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is stated that on 09.04.2019, the Investigating Officer along with the complainant went to Srinidhi Restaurant at Nagarbhavi and trap proceedings were arranged. Accused No.2 was present and when accused No.1 arrived it is stated that the tainted currency notes were handed over by the complainant to accused No.2. At that point of time, the Investigating Officer and his team entered and there was seizure of currency notes.
8. It is stated that the investigation is at an advanced stage. It is further stated that there are certain conversations which have been recorded and the matter has been referred to FSL for expert opinion. It is submitted that there is further investigation to be completed and taking note of the nature of the position of the petitioner, the request for enlargement of bail is to be rejected.
9. Insofar as the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.2996/2019 accused No.2 is concerned, it is stated that no offence has been made out against him as he is a private person and various other contentions have been advanced on the merits of the case.
10. Insofar as accused No.1 is concerned submissions have been made that offences have not been made out. It is contended that the punishment provided under Section 7(a)(A) is imprisonment which may be extended to 7 years. It is further submitted that there is no bar as such under the statute for granting of bail. It is also contended that the proceedings relating to grant of bail cannot be construed to be one to impose punishment. Taking note of the sentiments of the public and adjudicating to the detriment of the rights and liberties of the petitioner, is impermissible.
11. The prosecution however sought to object to the grant of bail and it is stated that matter arises out of offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act and has to be looked at differently in view of the implication of such offences on society. It is further stated that the investigation is at advanced stage. Hence, it is contended that looking into the nature of the position of the petitioner it would be appropriate to reject the bail.
12. After having heard the counsel on both the sides, it is to be noted that admittedly investigation is at advanced stage. Further it is to be noted that taking note of the nature of offence, the best evidence that is available is gathered at the time of trap. It is also on record that there has been recording of conversations and material has been sent to FSL for investigation. In the light of such evidence, that is already been collected, the question of apprehension relating to tampering of evidence does not arise and also taking note of the position of accused No.1 is concerned, the question of accused No.1 absconding or avoiding trial may not arise. However, to ensure co-operation with the trial, conditions are imposed.
13. No doubt the nature of offence and its implication on society is a matter to be taken note.
However there is no justification to continue to allow the petitioners to remain in custody. The proceedings while considering bail cannot be construed to be punitive in nature. In the light of the nature of evidence that already has been collected, it is a fit case to impose stringent conditions and to enlarge the accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail.
14. Accordingly, petitions are allowed and accused Nos.1 and 2 are enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court where the case in Crime No.12/2019 of Bengaluru City Police Station is pending.
(ii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation.
(iii) The petitioners shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer.
(iv) The petitioners shall not hamper the investigation, tamper with any documentary evidence.
(v) The petitioners shall mark their attendance before the concerned Investigating officer once in a week between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet.
(vi) The petitioners shall not indulge in any criminal activities henceforth.
(vii) If the petitioners violate any of the aforementioned conditions, the bail order shall automatically stand cancelled.
Sd/-
JUDGE NS/VBS