- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR

Transcription

1 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO /2015 CW/ CRIMINAL PETITION NO /2015 IN CRL.P.NO OF 2015: BETWEEN A. DEVENDRAPPA S/O. KOTRABASAPPA AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED PENSIONER R/O. BOVI COLONY, BEHIND KIRAN HOSPITAL H B HALLI, DIST: BALLARI... PETITIONER (BY SRI.: SREENIVAS B. NAIK, FOR K.L.PATIL, ADV.,) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD THROUGH SANDUR, POLICE STATION BALLARI... RESPONDENT (BY SMT.VEENA HEDGE, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THIS

2 - 2 - PETITIONER IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.108/2015 OF SANDUR POLICE STATION REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 409 & 420 OF IPC. IN CRL.P.NO OF 2015: BETWEEN R LAKSHMAN RAO S/O. R ANANTHARAO AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED PENSIONER R/O. H NO. 248, WARD NO. 32 KOTE VALMIKI CIRCLE HOSPET DIST: BALLARI... PETITIONER (BY SRI:SREENIVAS B. NAIK, FOR K.L.PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD THROUGH SANDUR POLICE STATION BALLARI... RESPONDENT (BY SMT.VEENA HEDGE, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THIS PETITIONER IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.108/2015 OF SANDUR POLICE STATION, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 409 & 420 OF IPC. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

3 - 3 - O R D E R Both these petitions are one under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for their enlargement on bail in the event of their arrest during the course of investigation in 108/2015 of Sandur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC. 2. The petitioner in Crl.P.No /2015 is accused No.1 and petitioner in Crl.P.No /2105 is accused No.2 in the aforesaid crime. One B.M.S. Veerayya, Executive Engineer, Taluk Panchayath, lodged a complaint before the Police Inspector on , wherein he alleged that both these petitioners were working as Panchayath Development Officers during the period to They made a payment of Rs.16,83,022/- without any vouchers. When they were issued with notice calling upon them to produce the vouchers, they gave a reply stating that they are retired from service and thereby they failed to produce the voucher in respect of payment of

4 - 4 - Rs.16,83,022/-. Therefore, a complaint came to be lodged alleging that they have misappropriated an amount of Rs.16,83,022/- A crime came to be registered against them for the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 IPC. Ever since registration of the crime on , the police are not able to take them to custody and to interrogate. Instead of cooperating with the Investigation Officer, they filed application for Anticipatory bail before the Sessions Judge, Bellary in Crl.Misc.No.468/2105. On merits, the application came to be rejected by order dated Even thereafter, the petitioners have not surrendered before the Investigation Officer. Instead of that, they filed the instant application before this Court for Anticipatory bail on the ground that they are innocent, they are retired in the year 2013, their pension is not sanctioned, they have been falsely implicated, they are permanent residents of Bellary, they are coming from respectable families, they have got family of dependants, they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be

5 - 5 - imposed by this Court and offer property surety for their enlargment on bail. 3. The High Court Government Pleader has opposed the bail petitions on the ground that the petitioners have misappropriated a sum of Rs.16 lakh and odd while working as Panchayath Development Officers. They made payment of Rs.16,83,022/- without voucher and when they were called upon to produce the voucher for the aforesaid payment by issuance of a notice, instead of furnishing the voucher, they gave a reply stating that they are retired. In a case of this nature, the investigation is impossible, unless the petitioners are taken to custody. It is further submitted, in all fairness, after rejection of their application by the Sessions Judge, they ought to have surrendered before the Investigation Officer and to cooperate with the Investigation agency. For all these reasons, the Government Pleader has sought for dismissal of both the petitions. Heard. Perused the records.

6 Admittedly, a crime came to be registered on The police are not able to make a headaway in the investigation because of the attitude of the petitioners. The application filed by them for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Judge came to be rejected on on merits. In all fairness, they ought to have surrendered before the Investigation Officer. It goes without saying that in a case of misappropriation and criminal breach of trust, custodial interrogation is indispensable. Unless the petitioners are taken to custody, no investigation can be made in these cases. After all, they were Government officials. They are answerable for the payment made by them without any vouchers. If they are in possession of vouchers, they are required to produce the vouchers. Be that as it may, the alleged offences are serious offences. If the persons involved in misappropriation cases are granted anticipatory bail, the very purpose of incorporating the provision of Section 438

7 - 7 - Cr.P.C. would be defeated. For all these reasons, both the petitions are rejected. Sd/- JUDGE *vnp/mn/-