Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1073 (KAR)

M. Srinivasa v. State of Karnataka

2022-08-16

K.NATARAJAN

body2022
JUDGMENT K. Natarajan, J. - Criminal Petition no. 6953/2022 is filed by petitioner/accused no. 3 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for granting anticipatory bail and Crl.P. No. 7087/2022 is filed by petitioner/accused no. 1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in Crime No. 62/2022 registered by the Galpet Police Station, Kolar District for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC. 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel in both cases and learned SPP -II for the State. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.06.2022 one Nagaraj, Tahasildar of Kolar taluk had filed complaint with the police alleging that he has received a file pertaining to land in Sy. No. 127 measuring 3 acres 23 guntas situated at Alahalli village, Vakkaleri Hobli, which is a locked land came for sanctioning in favour of accused no. 5-M/s. Sun Large Properties Pvt., Ltd., along with the sanction order allegedly being forged the signature of Deputy Commissioner, after verifying the colour xerox of the sanction order passed by the Deputy Commissioner he suspected the genuinity of the sanction order. Therefore, after making preliminary enquiry he has filed complaint with the police. After registering the case, police arrested accused no. 1-Manjunath, who said to be the Revenue Inspector of Vakkaleri Hobli, who said to be given the survey report by way of mahazar without mentioning the date. Police has also arrested accused no. 2 who said to be case worker and during the investigation it was revealed that the accused no. 1-Manjunath, Revenue Inspector and accused no. 4 who said to be land broker came to the office of the Tahasildar, L&D branch where one Gayatri was working at Tappal section, they themselves entered the inward register of the said file and taken the file to Srinivas-accused no. 3 who is the petitioner in Crl.P. no. 6953/2022. Subsequently, he said to be endorsed and forwarded the same to the Tahasildar for passing final order. 4. After arresting accused no. 1 and 2, remanded to the judicial custody. The name of petitioner/accused no. 3 mentioned in the statement of witnesses. Police making hectic effort to arrest accused no. 3 in this case. Therefore, he has approached the Sessions Judge for grant of anticipatory bail, which came to be rejected and he is before this Court for granting Anticipatory Bail. 5. Accused no. The name of petitioner/accused no. 3 mentioned in the statement of witnesses. Police making hectic effort to arrest accused no. 3 in this case. Therefore, he has approached the Sessions Judge for grant of anticipatory bail, which came to be rejected and he is before this Court for granting Anticipatory Bail. 5. Accused no. 1, who said to be arrested and was remanded for judicial custody. His bail petition has also came to be rejected by Sessions Judge. Hence, he is before this Court for granting regular bail. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner/accused no. 3 has contended that the petitioner is innocent for the alleged offences. His name is falsely implicated by further statement by complainant. Even in remand application there is no allegation against this petitioner-accused no. 3 for having committed any offence. He has worked in Tahasildar Office for more than 20 years as a Shirastedar and even his admitted signatures are available to the office for getting opinion of handwriting expert. He may not be required for custodial interrogation, even otherwise, he is ready to abide by any condition which may be imposed by this Court. He himself surrender before the Investigating Officer and ready to give his specimen signature for getting handwriting expert's opinion. The alleged offences though non-bailable but not punishable for death or imprisonment for life and triable by Magistrate and therefore prayed for granting of anticipatory bail. 7. Learned counsel for petitioner/accused no. 1 has contended that petitioner is in custody almost for more than 45 days. Investigation in respect of this petitioner is already completed. Except filing charge sheet his presence may not be required for further custodial interrogation. Accused no. 2 has already granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. He is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Police likely to file charge sheet within couple of weeks. Hence, he prayed for granting of bail. 8. Per contra, learned SPP-II, appearing for respondent-State Government vehemently objected the bail petition and contended that these accused nos. 1 and 4 in collusion with accused no. 3 and accused no. 5 have created Deputy Commissioner's order, even though earlier Deputy Commissioner has rejected the request of one Narayanaswamy for grant of the same land. Now accused no. 5 has assured to pay Rs. 10,00,000/- to these accused persons. 1 and 4 in collusion with accused no. 3 and accused no. 5 have created Deputy Commissioner's order, even though earlier Deputy Commissioner has rejected the request of one Narayanaswamy for grant of the same land. Now accused no. 5 has assured to pay Rs. 10,00,000/- to these accused persons. Hence, they took the application for granting the land but they are failed to get any sanction order from Deputy Commissioner and also from the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department. But subsequently, they forged the signature of Deputy Commissioner's for creating sanction order/grant order. Accused nos. 1 and 4 have directly made entries in the outward register of Deputy Commissioner's office. They directly came to the Tappal Section of Deputy Commissioner's office, wherein one witness Gayatri was present. Accused no. 1 himself entered the inward register along with EFO. Then he took the file to accused no. 3-who is the Shirestedar and in turn he also cleared the file and forwarded it to the Tahsildar for final order. 9. Learned SPP -II further contended that without collusion of these accused nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, the land grant order could not have created. Investigation is still under progress. Petitioner-accused no. 3 is required for custodial interrogation for not only seizing document but also getting specimen signatures. Accused no. 1 was actually participated along with accused nos. 4 and 5. Still accused nos. 4 and 5 are absconding. Accused no. 3 is also absconding. Accused persons have tried to grab the State land/Government land for their financial benefit. Therefore, they shall not be released on anticipatory bail or regular bail during pendency of investigation. Accused no. 3 is the master mind being creation and fabricating of documents. Accused no. 3 has worked for more than 20 years in the same office as Shirestedar. He was well aware that the land bearing Sy. No. 127 of Alahalli Village, Vakkaleri Hobli is a locked land. Inspite of the same, with collusion of accused no. 4 and 5 he created document. Therefore, it cannot be considered as a lighter offence and they tried to grab the Government land and tried to transfer it to the private persons for monitory benefit. Therefore, learned SPP -II prayed for rejecting the bail applications. 10. Inspite of the same, with collusion of accused no. 4 and 5 he created document. Therefore, it cannot be considered as a lighter offence and they tried to grab the Government land and tried to transfer it to the private persons for monitory benefit. Therefore, learned SPP -II prayed for rejecting the bail applications. 10. Having heard the arguments of learned counsel for petitioners and SPP-II and on perusal of records, it revealed that admittedly the enquiry pertaining to land in Sy. No. 127 of Alahalli village came to the hands of the Gayatri who is incharge of tappal section. The file was numbered as LNDCR 1/20-21 which was directly brought by the accused no. 1 -Manjunath along with correspondent accused no. 4, who is said to be the land broker. The statement of Gayatri reveals that accused nos. 1 and 4 have directly came to the office and accused no. 1 himself made entries in inward register and forwarded the file to accused no. 3-Srinivasa, Shirestedar who was working in the same office for the last twenty years. Subsequently, he also said to be cleared the file for final order, which has to be passed by the Tahasildar, who is the complainant herein. Admittedly, complainant has suspected the colour xerox copy of the land grant order which was produced by them and alleged to have been signed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar, as it may be created one and he cross-checked the same. One witness was also examined by the Investigating Officer, namely one Venkatesh who was working in Tappal section in outward register of Deputy Commissioner's office. He stated that he had not sent any such file by entering the it in outward register of Deputy Commissioner's office. Subsequently, it was accused nos. 1 and 4 who made entries of the file in outward register as the order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner and forwarded it to the Tahasildar for further course of action. 11. During the investigation, it is also revealed that accused no. 2-Shylaja who said to be the case worker also endorsed the file for final order. Of course accused no. 2 who has minor child to look-after has been granted bail by Sessions Court. Investigation is still under progress. The remand application of accused no. 1 reveals that accused no. 11. During the investigation, it is also revealed that accused no. 2-Shylaja who said to be the case worker also endorsed the file for final order. Of course accused no. 2 who has minor child to look-after has been granted bail by Sessions Court. Investigation is still under progress. The remand application of accused no. 1 reveals that accused no. 1 being a Revenue Inspector visited the spot and prepared mahazar showing ground reality of land for the purpose of taking further action either by the Deputy Commissioner or the Tahasildar. But knowing fully well, when he was the Revenue Inspector earlier, that the same file was rejected by Deputy Commissioner and also by Principal Secretary, he has prepared a mahazar for giving endorsement without showing dates and it was him, who himself has mentioned entries in the inward register of the Tahasildar office, to make good as the file was sent by the Deputy Commissioner's office. Infact it has to come through proper channel but accused no. 1, he himself took the file physically (muddam), after mentioning the same in the inward register, to accused no. 3-Srinivasa, petitioner in the Crl.P. 6953/2022 and this petitioner having worked as a Shirastedar for long years and knowing fully well the entire facts of the case in respect of the said land, which was land locked kharab Government land, has mentioned the same as Gomala land and tried to dispose off the land in favour of accused no. 5 for getting financial support from him. Accused nos. 4 and 5 are still absconding. 12. Accused no. 5 is said to be the beneficiary of the land, if it was ordered by the Tahasildar. Therefore, it cannot be said that accused no. 3 does not have any knowledge about the land in Sy. No. 127 of Alahalli village. He was very much familiar with the said land, who had already handled the file when the Deputy Commissioner has rejected the request of one Narayanswamy, who is the owner of adjacent land, has requested for granting the land in his favour. Therefore, looking into the entire prosecution case, the presence of accused no. 3 is definitely required for custodial interrogation for the police to come to the correct conclusion. 13. Accused no. Therefore, looking into the entire prosecution case, the presence of accused no. 3 is definitely required for custodial interrogation for the police to come to the correct conclusion. 13. Accused no. 1 being the Revenue Inspector knowing fully well and intentionally has created documents and placed it before the Tahasildar for getting favourable order in favour of accused no. 5 and fortunately the Tahasildar who got alerted and suspected the document-order of the Deputy Commissioner and stopped the order. Otherwise, the Government land more than 3 acres and worth of more than Rs. 6.00 crores could have grabbed by the third parties in collusion with Government Officials, especially Revenue Department's staff. 14. Therefore, I am of the view that both petitioners i.e., accused no. 3 is required for custodial interrogation and until investigation completed, accused no. 1 cannot be released on bail. Therefore, both the bail petitions, Crl.P. No. 6953/2022 filed by accused no. 3 filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. and Crl.P. No. 7087/2022 filed by accused no. 1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. are here by dismissed.