Karnataka High Court
R D Patil @ Rudragouda vs The State on 28 May, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200159 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
R.D.PATIL @ RUDRAGOUDA
S/O DEVINDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC: CLASS-I,
CIVIL CONTRACTOR,
R/O SONNA TALUK,
AFZALAPUR DISTRICT,
KALABURAGI,
AT PRESENT PLOT NO.42,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
NEW HIGH COURT RING ROAD,
KALABURAGI - 585 107.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M.S.SHYAM SUNDAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. SHIVKUMAR D. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION,
KALABURAGI,
2
(REPRESENTING BY LEARNED ADDL. S.P.P.,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
AT KALABURAGI - 585 105.)
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. B. N. JAGADEESH, SPP ALONG WITH;
SMT. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND
RELEASE THE ACCUSED PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.
160/2023 OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 420, 120(B),
109, 114, 36, 37, 34, OF IPC AND 66(D) OF IT ACT AND
SECTION 2D (E) (F), 3 OF KCOCA ACT OF ASHOK NAGAR
P.S PENDING PRL. SESSION JUDGE AT KALABURAGI IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 25.04.2024 THIS DAY, THE
COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON: 27.03.2024
PRONOUNCED ON : 28.05.2024
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in Crime No.160/2023 registered by Ashok Nagar Police, Kalaburagi for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 120B, 109, 114, 36, 37 R/W 34 of IPC and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, and Section 2(d)(e)(f), Section 3 3 of the Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'KCOCA'), pending on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi.
2. Heard the arguments of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional SPP for the respondent-State.
3. The case of prosecution is that on the complaint of one Shilpa, who is Assistant Lecturer in Sharanabasava University, the police registered the case. It is alleged in the complaint that on 28.10.2023 between 10.30 a.m. and 12.30 p.m., there was examination conducted by Karnataka Education Authority (KEA) in respect of FDA recruitment. Hence, she was posted as supervisor of the said examination at Block No.2H8, Room No.38. At about 11.30 a.m., the Deputy Director of the KEA and the police brought accused No.1-Trimurthy and on enquiry, accused No.1 was found writing the examination by using the Bluetooth device. On further enquiry, he has stated that his brother 4 accused No.2-Ambarish said to be giving answers from outside. Immediately, both of them were arrested and taken to the police station and an FIR was registered. During investigation, the accused persons gave confession statement that the petitioner-accused No.3 said to be helped them by giving the Bluetooth device by receiving money. Accused No.3 said to be received Rs.3.00 lakhs from accused Nos.1 and 2 and the remaining amount of Rs.4.00 lakhs payable after the examination. Hence, the police arrested the petitioner on 10.11.2023 and he was remanded to judicial custody. During the investigation, the police invoked Section 2 and 3 of KCOCA. The bail petition of the petitioner was dismissed by the trial Court. Hence, he is before this Court.
4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has seriously contended that the petitioner is in custody for almost 6 months, the police are likely to file charge sheet within a week and the entire case is based upon the voluntary statement of the co-accused persons, which is not 5 admissible. The learned Senior Counsel has further contended that there is no recovery of any incriminating material from the petitioner, no documents were seized, even there is no seizure of Bluetooth device from the petitioner. Such being the case, the police have purposefully added Sections 2 and 3 of KCOCA, in order prevent him for release from the jail. Therefore, he prayed for granting bail.
5. Per contra, learned Additional SPP has seriously objected the petition contending that the petitioner-accused No.3 is not only involved in this case, but 7 other cases have also been registered against him. He has received more than Rs.1.5 crores from the various persons and helped them for the examination. The learned Additional SPP further contended that the petitioner is not only involved in the FDA recruitment scam, but he is also involved in the PSI recruitment scam and other recruitment scam. He is continuously involving in the recruitment scams by receiving money. It is also contended that the 6 investigation is still pending and the petitioner is in custody in all the other cases. If the petitioner is released on bail, he will commit the similar offence. Therefore, prayed for dismissing the petition.
6. The learned Additional SPP also contended that the petitioner-accused changed the mode of receiving the payment. He used to receive the payment from the relative of the candidates and the said amount was deposited to some other persons account. Thereafter, he used to keep in UTI or FD etc., and was not using his account for receiving money from the account of the candidates. So many accused were arrested in this case. The learned Additional SPP also contended that the petitioner purchased Bluetooth device from accused No.16, who is not traced, and still he is absconding. It is further contended that the petitioner is the influential person, and if he is granted bail, he may tamper the prosecution witnesses and he may destroy the evidence. Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition. 7
7. Having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, perused the records, which reveals that the petitioner came to be arrested on the confession statement made by accused Nos.1 and 2. Accused No.1 was caught red hand while writing the FDA recruitment examination on 28.10.2023 by using the bluetooth device. Accused No.2 was found giving answers from sitting outside the examination venue, and during the interrogation, it was found that this petitioner-accused No.3 by receiving Rs.3.00 lakhs had supplied the Bluetooth device to the other accused persons and also with the help of the employee of the University helped the other accused. The statement of the said employee has been recorded and he has given statement that at the request of the accused, he helped in keeping the device in the examination venue for facilitating accused No.1 to connect with bluetooth device. It is further stated that walkie and talkie was also used by the accused persons.
8
8. The petitioner is said to be received Rs.3.00 lakhs from accused Nos.1 and 2, and accused No.2 also received Rs.4.00 lakhs, by the time they have been arrested. Though the police previously not invoked the provisions of KCOCA, but later, they invoked the KCOCA as the accused persons were involved in more than 8 cases in the PSI recruitment scam case and also 8 cases in the FDA recruitment scam case. The petitioner is also involved in the Junior Engineer Exanimation case. It is said that the petitioner has received more than Rs.1.50 crores from the various persons by using one Siddarama-the accused in crime No.144/2023 registered at Yadgir police station. The statement of the witnesses under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded which reveals the involvement of the petitioner in this case and also 7 other cases registered in various police stations.
9. Of course, the petitioner is in custody for almost 6 months and the charge sheet is likely to be filed within short period as 180 days is concluding within 10 days. 9 However, there is a bar for granting the bail to the accused, who is involved in various cases as per Sub-section (5) of Section 22 of KCOCA, which is as under:
Section 22(5): Not withstanding anything contained in the Code, the accused shall not be granted bail if it is noticed by the Court that he was on bail in an offence under this Act or any other Act on the date of offence in question.
10. In view of the provision of Section 22(5) of the KCOCA, it is seen that the petitioner was involved in PSI recruitment scam case and he was released on bail. During the bail, once again he was involved in the FDA recruitment scam. That apart, the petitioner was also on bail in the case in respect of the junior examination recruitment registered at Annapoorneshwari Nagar, Bangalore. This Court has also rejected the bail application of this petitioner in respect of other cases registered against him in the PSI recruitment scam. As the petitioner is the influential person, he may 10 commit the similar offence and tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
11. Therefore, I am of the view that if the petitioner is granted bail, definitely, he may commit similar offence. He has become habitual offender, by receiving huge money from the candidates who have written in the recruitment examinations conducted by the State Government through different modes. Still some of the accused are absconding and they have not been arrested. The alleged offence is punishable with death and/or imprisonment of life, and therefore, if the petitioner is granted bail, he may tamper with prosecution witnesses, and destroying the documentary evidence is not ruled out. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for bail.
12. Accordingly, this petition filed by the petitioner- accused No.3 is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE Cs Ct:Sk