MANDYA DISTRICT v. (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, SPP-I)

#5. SRI KRISHNA MURTHY, S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, RESIDING AT MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, BADANAVE, NEHRU NAGAR, BELUR, HASSAN DISTRICT.

#6. SRI SHIVANANDA, S/O LATE NINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.15-A, NEHRU NAGARA, BELUR, KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN DISTRICT.

#7. SRI S. RAVISHANKAR, S/O SHIVANANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.16, HEMAVATHI, T.B. BADAVANE, SARINUGALA KAPPALU, NAGAMANGALA TALUK, 3 MANDYA DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI A.N. RADHA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY BELUR POLICE, NOW INVESTIGATION TAKEN OVER BY C.I.D. DETECTIVE BEUREAU, SED BRANCH, C.I.D., BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC POSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU – 560 001. (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, SPP-I) …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF BNS, 2023 TO DIRECT THE BELUR POLICE, NOW INVESTIGATION TAKEN OVER BY SPECIAL INVESTIGATION SQUARD/SECTION C.I.D. POLICE, BENGALURU, THAT, IN THE EVENT OF PETITIONERS BEING ARRESTED IN CRI.NO.98/2023 OF BELURU POLICE FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 468, 464, 465, 471, 409, 420, 120(B) OF IPC NOW PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED 42ND ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY, THE PETITIONERS MAY BE ENLARGED ON BAIL. 4 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 07.08.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CAV ORDER The petitioners are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail concerning charge sheet filed in Crime No.98 of 2023 registered by the Belur Police though they were not included in the FIR at the first instance and the order dated 06-07-2026 passed by the LXXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions judge, Bengaluru in Criminal Miscellaneous No.6258 of 2026.

#2. Heard Sri A.N.Radhakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, learned State Public Prosecutor-1 appearing for the respondent.

#3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: - The petitioners in the case at hand are not the accused who are named in the charge sheet and are investigated into by 5 issuance of notices in Crime No.98 of 2023 qua other accused. Therefore, they sought anticipatory bail at the hands of the concerned Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.6258 of 2026, which came to be rejected on 06-07-2026. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail. The person who have been already arrayed as accused and are being investigated into have been granted anticipatory bail at the hands of this Court in terms of its order dated 09-01-2025 in Criminal Petition No.13665 of 2024 by the following order: “Heard Sri Aman Nalina Lingesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent - State.

#2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail, for it having been turned down by the concerned Court in Crl. Misc. Nos.8899/2024. This Court qua other accused in Crl.P.No.11870/2024 disposed on 28.11.2024 has granted anticipatory bail to a co-accused by rendering the following reasons: “3. This Court has while directing investigation to be conducted into the alleged bartering away of the government land has observed as follows: - “The petitioners at the relevant point in time i.e., between 2016 and 2023 were in the Council, all of them being political entities appointed as Chairman and Members of a particular Committee; Committee known as Bagair Hukum Saguvali Samithi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Samithi’ for short). Accused No.1 / 1st petitioner was at the relevant point in time a Member of the Legislative Assembly of Belur constituency. He was the Chairman of the Samithi. 6 Accused Nos.2 to 4 were its members and accused Nos.5 to 10 were the erstwhile members. Accused Nos.11 to 14 are the Tahsildars who were functioning at the relevant point in time at the said place and were Secretaries of the Samithi. The allegation revolves around the functioning of the said Samithi. It is alleged that the Samithi has created records and bartered away Government lands to an extent of 2750 acres to 1430 bogus beneficiaries, which are valued at more than Rs.750/- crores in the constituency of accused No.1, who was the Chairman of the Samithi. 2nd Based respondent/complainant seeks to knock at the doors of the jurisdictional Police to register the complaint. No action was taken. He knocks at the doors of the learned Magistrate invoking Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. seeking a reference for conduct of investigation into the allegations so made. The complaint is referred for investigation to the jurisdictional Police under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., after which a crime comes to be registered in Crime No.98 of 2023 for the aforequoted offences. This Court by its order dated 16.06.2023 directed that no precipitate action be taken against the petitioners and the same is subsisting even as on date. allegation,

#3. Heard Sri Ashok Haranahalli, learned senior for the petitioners, Sri B.N. counsel appearing Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri S. Umapathi, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

#4. The learned senior counsel would seek to contend that the complaint is bald and vague. What are the lands that are granted or what are the documents that are fabricated to grant the lands in favour of fictitious persons is not forthcoming from the complaint. If the complaint is so bald, the learned senior counsel would submit that what investigation the police would do, is ununderstandable. He would submit that all the allegations are untrue and some of the accused being Government servants, no sanction is accorded under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. The learned senior counsel would submit that the present complaint is an abuse of the process of law and the members of the Samithi have acted strictly in consonance with law.

#5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the complainant would take this Court through the statement of objections so filed by him and reports of filed by themselves when Government servants 7 into the enquiry was directed to be held by the Assistant Commissioner illegalities. The Assistant Commissioner clearly holds that all the lands granted fake genealogical tree were bogus based upon certificates and granted to fake beneficiaries. The Government land in this manner is illegally donated for personal gains of the members of the Chairman, members of the Samithi and officers. He would contend that the question of sanction would arise only after investigation. The matter should be permitted to be investigated.” Xxxxxx In view of the preceding analysis, I hold that Bagair Hukum Committee has acted Bagair Kanoon, albeit, prima facie.

#12. Finding no merit in the petition, the petition stands rejected. It is made clear that the observations made in the course of the order are only for the purpose of consideration of the case of petitioners under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the same shall not bind or influence the proceedings pending against them.” seeking Pursuant to the dismissal of the aforesaid petition, in which the present petitioner is the 8th petitioner, files Crl. Misc.No.8899/2024 anticipatory bail in the light of the investigation permitted by this Court. This is turned down on the score that this Court has directed investigation as the role of this petitioner is also found. A perusal at the complaint or the finding rendered by this Court while dismissing the aforesaid Crl.P.No.5030/2023 nothing in particular against this petitioner who was a member of the Committee and an advocate of the area is found, prima facie, while several allegations are found against others.”

#4. In the light of the petitioners being members of the Committee and the offences not heinous or punishable beyond seven years of imprisonment, I the petitioners anticipatory bail.” it appropriate to grant

#3. In the light of anticipatory bail being granted to the co- accused, I deem it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the present petitioners. 8

#4. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER a. The criminal petition filed by the petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. b. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.98/2023 of Belur Police Station, on the following conditions: (i) The petitioners shall furnish a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court; (ii) The petitioners shall be regular in appearing before the Court on every date of hearing as also when called upon to do so by the Trial Court; (iii) The petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or cause any threat to any of the prosecution witness/s in any manner. (iv) The petitioners Investigating Officer as and when called and submit all documents and details as may be called upon by the Investigating Officer. appear before (v) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of this Court without prior permission. (vi) In the event of violation of any of the above terms, the above bail shall stand automatically cancelled. The observations made above are only for the purpose of consideration of the application for anticipatory bail and the same shall not in any manner influence the trial. The Trial Court shall consider the case on its merits and without being influenced by this order. Ordered accordingly.” 9 In the light of the afore-quoted order and the petitioners have not been drawn as accused, they are entitled to grant of anticipatory bail.

#4. For the aforesaid reasons, the following order: O R D E R (i) Criminal petition is allowed. (ii) Petitioners are granted anticipatory bail and are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.98/2023 of Belur Police Station, on the following conditions: (a) The petitioners shall furnish a personal bond for a sum of ₹1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each with one solvent surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court; (b) The petitioners shall be regular in appearing before the Court on every date of hearing as also when called upon to do so by the Trial Court; 10 (c) The petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or cause any threat to any of the prosecution witness(s) in any manner; (d) The petitioners appear before Investigating Officer as and when called and submit all documents and details as may be called upon by the Investigating Officer; (e) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission; (f) In the event of violation of any of the above terms, this bail shall stand automatically cancelled. The observations made above are only for the purpose of consideration of the application for anticipatory bail and the same shall not in any manner influence the trial. The Trial Court shall consider the case on its merits and without being influenced by this order. NVJ CT:BR Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE