Karnataka High Court
Sri A Maruthi Kumar vs State Of Karnataka By on 3 October, 2018
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 KAR 1284
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6462/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI A MARUTHI KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
S/O ANJINAPPA
R/AT NO 69/1,
BEHIND MEENAKSHI TEMPLE
HULIMAVU, B G ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560076
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI VENKATESH H. N., ADV.)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
POLICE SUB INSPECTOR,
BMTF POLICE STATION
N R SQUARE, BBMP MAIN BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560002
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI M. DIWAKAR MADDUR, HCGP.)
This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in
Cr.No.49/2018 registered by Bengaluru Metropolitan Task
2
Force Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences
P/U/Ss.33 and 72 of BDA Act and Sections 120(b), 409
and 420 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in crime No.49/2018 of BMTF Police Station, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 33 and 72 of BDA Act and Sections 120(b), 409 and 420 of IPC.
2. The gist of the case are that:
The complainant on receiving credible information that the land measuring 2 acres 35 guntas in survey No.176/1 situated at Kothanuru village , Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, which was originally belonging to BDA and acquired for J.P.Nagar 8th Block and same grabbed by colluding with government officials and there is criminal breach of trust and the same is pending before 3 the Court below and now, the petitioner apprehending his arrest has approached this Court for releasing him on anticipatory bail.
3. I have heard Sri H.N.Venkatesh, learned counsel for petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the said officials of BMTF have no jurisdiction and no power to register the case and proceed with the matter. He further submitted by drawing the attention of this Court to the complaint and other material, before registration of the case, the investigating officer investigated the case and proceeded with the matter and thereafter, registered the case. He further submitted that land in survey No.176/1 belong to his grandfather and by virtue of the document, the same has been transmitted to the petitioner - accused and he is in lawful 4 possession and no offence has been committed in this behalf. The offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the petitioner - accused will abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and is ready to offer surety. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and release the petitioner - accused on anticipatory bail.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner - accused has committed a serious offence by grabbing the land belonging to Bengaluru Development Authority by creating documents and with collusion with some government officials. He further submitted that the petitioner - accused is required for interrogation and investigation and if the petitioner - accused is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he may abscond, not be available for further investigation of the case or he may tamper with the prosecution evidence. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
5
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions of learned counsel for both parties, the contents of the complaint and other materials which have been produced in this behalf. Though several allegations are made in this behalf, this is the matter which has to be considered and appreciated only at the time of trial. I am not going into the merits of the case. The offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the petitioner - accused has bound himself that he will be available for investigation and interrogation. Under the said facts and circumstances, I feel that the apprehension of the learned Government Pleader would be met if the petitioner - accused is granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions.
7. In the above said facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed and the petitioner - accused is enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 49/2018 of BMTF Police Station, Bengaluru, registered for 6 the offences punishable under Sections 33 and 72 of BDA Act and Sections 120(b), 409 and 420 of IPC, with following conditions:
1. Petitioner - accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Agency.
2. He shall surrender before the Investigating Agency within 15 days from today.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner directly or indirectly.
4. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
5. He shall co-operate with the investigation.
Sd/-
JUDGE nvj