Karnataka High Court
Mr.Shyamaraju vs State Of Karnataka By on 24 July, 2023
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5301 OF 2023
BETWEEN
MR. SHYAMARAJU
S/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT NO.212, OPP. MUNESWARA TEMPLE,
SANJAYANAGAR MAIN ROAD,
NAGASHETTIHALLI,
BANGALORE - 560 094.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI HASHMATH PASHA, SENIOR ADVOCATE
FOR SRI KARIYAPPA N.A., ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
HALASURUGATE POLICE STATION,
BANGALORE - 560 008.
(INVESTIGATED BY CCB POLICE,
BANGALORE)
(REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE)
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI S. VISHWA MURTHY, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.180/2022 OF
HALASURGATE P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 420, 465, 468, 471, 255, 258,
259, 260 AND 120(B) READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC ON THE
2
FILE OF THE LXII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE (CCH-63) IN S.C.NO.1916/2022.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 12.7.2023, THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This successive bail petition is filed by the petitioner- accused No.4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for granting regular bail in Crime No.180/2022 registered by Halasurgate Police Station and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 255, 258, 259, 260, 465, 468, 473, 420 read with 34 of IPC, pending on the file of I Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru
2. Heard the arguments of learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that suo-motu complaint was registered by the Halasurgate police station, Bengaluru, against the petitioner and others on 19.07.2022, for the aforesaid offences, alleging that they 3 received credible information that some persons were selling the fake E-stamps at Kandaya Bhavana, Bengaluru. Therefore, the police set up a D-Kayath customer for purchasing the old stamp papers near Kandaya Bhavana. Accordingly, the D-Kayath police man, met one Karthik, asked about the old stamp paper for the face value of Rs.50/- five in numbers and stamp papers for the value of Rs.10/- five in numbers. Then Karthik asked to meet one Vishwanath/accused No.1 and later, the said Vishwanath told D-Kayath police to give a sum of Rs.10,000/- as advance amount and for the purpose of giving e-stamp for the face value of Rs.10/-, they have charged Rs.5,000/- and to give e-stamp for the face value of Rs.50/-, they have charged Rs.6,000/-. Accordingly, on 19.07.2022 at 07:30 a.m., accused No.3 and petitioner-accused NO.4 brought the said e-stamp papers. Then police trapped them and seized ten stamp papers under seizure panchanama. During investigation, the accused were arrested and remanded to judicial custody. The bail application of this petitioner came to be dismissed on 4 23.09.2022. Now the petitioner is once again before this Court after filing of the charge sheet.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner contended, the petitioner is in custody for almost one year. The investigation completed long back, charge sheet has been filed and case has been committed to the Court of Sessions. The co-accused No.9 granted bail by this court on 10.7.2023. The allegation against this petitioner are similar to the said accused, therefore, prayed for granting bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader has seriously objected the petition and contended that this Court has rejected the bail petition of all the other accused persons. This petitioner was found with the old stamp papers and E- stamp papers he was brought along with accused No.3 and caught red handed. Thereafter, his shop was raided and some more documents were seized. Because of the petitioner and accused No.3, the other accused persons used to receive the old stamp papers for 5 creating the false general power of attorney and agreement of sale and using to file false complaints and suits before the Courts to cheat the public at large. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner has not committed the offence alleged against him. If at all the petitioner is only a xerox shop owner, the question of keeping the fake stamp papers does not arise. The petitioner used to take out the printouts in collusion with accused No.3 and he used to charge more money for the stamp papers, which is revealed from investigation. Learned HCGP submits the ground of parity is not available to this petitioner as there is lot of incriminating material seized from this petitioner. Hence, prayed for rejecting the bail petition.
6. Having heard the arguments of learned counsel parties and on perusal of the records, which reveals that the police apprehended this petitioner along with accused no.3 when they brought the E-stamp papers which were trapped and seized with the police. This court rejected the 6 bail petition of this petitioner, thrice. Now once again this petition came to be filed for bail. Ofcourse, this court granted bail to the accused No.9 who were in possession of only one old stamp paper pertaining to 2009 which was in the name of one Pramila and accused No.9 was arrested only based upon the voluntary statement of these accused No.7. But this petitioner caught red handed along with the E-stamp papers, when he came for selling at the instance of accused No.1 to the D-kayath police. On inventory made in his xerox shop, he had a hard disk and various stamp papers from his possession. Therefore, it cannot be compared with the allegation made against accused No.9, these petitioners have caused huge loss to the State Exchequer, by printing and distributing the counterfeit stamp papers and he was seller and fabricator of the E-stamps. This petitioner was found arrested with the 5 stamp papers worth face value of Rs.1/- each, 4 papers worth face value of Rs.20/-, two stamp papers valuing Rs.50/-, 5 stamp papers of value of Rs.100/-, 4 stamp papers value of Rs.500/- and 3 stamp papers with 7 face value of Rs.5000/-. There is serious allegation against this petitioner for having found in possession of fake E-stamp papers. Such being the case, the ground of parity is not available to this petitioner. This court rejected his bail petition just a month prior to filing of this present petition. Therefore, I am of the view, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every chance of further committing the similar offence, selling the counterfeit stamp papers, are not ruled out. Hence, petitioner is not entitled for bail.
Accordingly, this petition is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE AKV