Allowed

Sri. Shanthakumar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Oct 2023CRL.P/4848/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail petitions filed for three accused government servants involved in a recruitment racket alleging fraud in selection by tampering with OMR answer sheets. The High Court of Karnataka allowed bail, citing the completion of investigation and the petitioners status as government servants mitigating flight risk.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail subject to personal bond of Rs.5 lakhs with two sureties, residential address proof, and non-interference with witnesses.

Sri. Shanthakumar Vs the State of Karnataka — Corruption | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶6

CRL.P. No.4848/2023 C/W

¶7

CRL.P. No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶8

IN CRL.P.NO.4848/2023:

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

Digitally signed by B A KRISHNA KUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SRI SHANTHAKUMAR S/O LATE CHANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NO.02, 19TH BLOCK KAVERI COMPLEX AUDUGODI POLICE QUARTERS BENGALURU - 560 030.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADV., FOR SRI D.N. DHANU KUMAR, ADV. )

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY CID (CT & R) SQUAD, BENGALURU REP BY LEARNED SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI PRASANNA KUMAR P, ADV.)

¶18

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE CR.NO.60/2022 REGISTERED IN HIGH

¶19

¶20

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶21

GROUNDS POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120B, 36, 37, 119, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 201 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC AND SEC. 7(A)(C) R/W 7A, 8, 13(1)(A), R/W SEC. 13(2) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988, PENDING ON THE FILE OF XXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE (PC ACT) BANGALORE (CCH-24).

¶22

IN CRL.P.NO.5123/2023:

¶23

BETWEEN:

¶24

SRI MADHU S.V S/O LATE RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.4 B BLOCK, POLICE QUARTERS BENGALURU - 560 047.

¶25

...PETITIONER

¶26

(BY SRI SANDESH CHOUTA, SR. COUNSEL FOR SMT. SANYA MALLI, ADV.)

¶27

AND:

¶28

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HIGH GROUNDS POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶29

…RESPONDENT

¶30

(BY SRI PRASANNA KUMAR P,SPL.P.P)

¶31

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE CR.NO.60/2022 REGISTERED IN HIGH GROUNDS POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120B, 119, 201, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 201 R/W SEC. 34, 36, 37 OF IPC AND SEC. 7(a)(c), 7A, 8, 13(1)(a) R/W 13(2) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988, PENDING ON THE FILE

¶32

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶33

OF XXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE (PC ACT) BANGALORE (CCH-24).

¶34

IN CRL.P.NO.7037/2023:

¶35

BETWEEN:

¶36

D. HARSHA S/O LATE DODDANANJAIAH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 739, CID POLICE QUARTERS KENGERI BENGALURU - 560 060.

¶37

...PETITIONER

¶38

(BY SRI SANDESH J CHOUTA, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI ARUN G, ADV.)

¶39

AND:

¶40

STATE BY HIGH GROUND POLICE STATION (INVESTIGATION BY C.I.D BENGALURU) BANGALORE - 560 010 REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE)

¶41

…RESPONDENT

¶42

(BY SRI PRASANNA KUMAR P, SPL.P.P)

¶43

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.29 ON BAIL IN SPL.C.C.NO.590/2023 (ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.60/20220 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE U/S 120B, 201, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471 AN D34 OF IPC. WHICH IS REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT HIGH GROUNDS POLICE (INVESTIGATION BY CID) PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE XXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE (P.C. ACT) BENGALURU (CCH NO.24) BY ALLOWING THE MEMORANDUM OF CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED U/S

¶44

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶45

439 OF CR.P.C. AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF/RELIEFS AS THIS COURT DEEMS FIT.

¶46

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶47

ORDER

¶48

Accused nos.29, 31 & 33 in Spl.C.C.No.590/2023 pending before the Court of XXIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge & Special Judge (PC Act), Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.60/2022 registered by High Grounds Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 36, 37, 119, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 201 read with 34 IPC and Sections 7(A)(C) read with 7A, 8, 13(1)(A), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, are before this Court under Section 439 Cr.PC.

¶49

Heard the learned Counsels for the parties.

¶50

Brief facts of the case are that, the Government of Karnataka issued Notification No.98/Recruitment-2/2020-21 dated 21.01.2021 inviting applications for filling up 545 PSI vacancies in the Police Department from eligible candidates through online. Physical test of the candidates who submitted the application was conducted and date was fixed for

¶51

¶52

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶53

conducting written test of the selected candidates at 91 centres, on 03.10.2021. It is alleged in the present case that, the accused persons conniving with each other with an intention to earn money illegally by selecting the candidates in a fraudulent way, instructed the candidates who were willing to pay money, to answer only few questions in the answer sheet and to leave the remaining questions blank and later, on receiving the answer sheets in the recruitment division, filled the blank spaces in the OMR sheets and fraudulently selected ineligible candidates to the post of PSI.

¶54

The allegations against the petitioners is that they had conspired with accused no.35 who was working as ADGP, Recruitment Wing of Police Department and was the head of the entire recruitment process and had hatched a conspiracy to get undeserved candidates selected to the post of PSI by allowing them to tamper with the original OMR answer sheets. It is the case of the prosecution that the answer sheets which were collected after the examination were sealed and stored in kit boxes in the strong room situated in the Recruitment Wing and accused no.35 being the head of the entire recruitment

¶55

¶56

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶57

process was entrusted with the duty to keep the safe custody of the keys of the kit boxes. However, in furtherance of the conspiracy, on 05.10.2021, the CCTV installed in the office where the OMR answer sheets were kept, were turned off on instructions from accused no.35 and the OMR sheets were removed from the strong room and tampered by filling correct answers in the blank space and the accused had, therefore, helped ineligible candidates to be appointed as PSI for extraneous reasons after having illegally collected more than Rs.5 crores for the aforesaid favour to be done to the ineligible candidates. Major portion of the amount collected was handed over to accused no.5.

¶58

During the course of investigation in the aforesaid case, accused no.29 was arrested on 09.05.2022, accused no.31 was arrested on 12.05.2022 and accused no.33 was arrested on 16.05.2022. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. The prosecution subsequently also has filed additional charge sheet in the aforesaid case. Undisputedly, the entire investigation in the case is completed as on this date. The bail application filed by the petitioners

¶59

¶60

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶61

before the XXIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, was dismissed. Therefore, they are before this Court.

¶62

Learned Senior Counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are Government servants and they are in custody for more than one year. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. The maximum punishment for the alleged offences is imprisonment for 10 years. Accused no.35 has been granted bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.3696/2023 disposed of on 25.09.2023. Accordingly, they pray to allow the petition.

¶63

Per contra, the Special Counsel appearing for the respondent has seriously opposed the petitions. He submits that the bail applications of accused nos.30 & 34 who were similarly placed, in Crl.P.No.12083/2022 and Crl.P.No.11769/2022 has been rejected by the coordinate bench of this Court. In the event of petitioners being enlarged on bail, they are likely to tamper with the prosecution witnesses having regard to their position. Accordingly, he has prayed to dismiss the petitions.

¶64

¶65

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶66

In pursuance to the notification issued by the

¶67

Government of Karnataka inviting applications to fill up 545 posts of Civil PSI, written exams were conducted at different centres across Karnataka and final selection list was published on 19.01.2022. As it was found that the candidates who had appeared for the written examination had indulged in malpractices, an inquiry was held and thereafter, a case was registered in Crime No.48/2022 by Chowk Police Station, Kalaburagi, for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420, 120B read with 34 IPC. In the said case, the allegations are of writing examination by candidates by using blue tooth devices. During the course of investigation, it was found that certain other middlemen and police officials had conspired with accused no.35 and had helped accused nos.1 to 22 by tampering their OMR answer sheets.

¶68

The allegation against the petitioners is that they have collected amount from undeserving candidates in furtherance of the conspiracy hatched along with accused no.35, and thereafter, have tampered the OMR answer sheets of the said candidates from whom they had collected money. Accused

¶69

¶70

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶71

no.35 who was working as ADGP of the Recruitment Wing to whom the petitioners herein were reporting, in furtherance of the conspiracy hatched, has been enlarged on bail by the coordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.3696/2023 disposed of on 25.09.2023.

¶72

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SATENDAR

¶73

KUMAR ANTIL VS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION &

¶74

ANOTHER - (2022)10 SCC 51 , has laid certain guidelines for grant of bail, which are as under:

¶75

A. Offences punishable with imprisonment of 7 years or less not falling in category B and D.

¶76

B. Offences punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for more than 7 years.

¶77

C. Offences punishable under Special Acts containing stringent provisions for bail like NDPS (S.37), PMLA (S.45), UAPA (S.43D(5)), Companies Act, 212(6), etc.

¶78

D. Economic offences not covered by Special Acts.

¶79

10 - NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶80

In the present case, the maximum punishment for the offences for which the petitioners are charge sheeted is ten years.

¶81

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SANJAY CHANDRA VS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION - (2012)1 SCC 40 , has set out certain parameters for consideration of bail and it is held that gravity alone cannot be the decisive ground to deny bail. It is also held in the said case that any imprisonment before conviction has a substantial punitive content and it would be improper for any court to refuse bail as a mark of disapproval of former conduct whether the accused has been convicted for it or not or to refuse bail to an unconvicted person for the purpose of giving him in a taste of imprisonment as a lesson.

¶82

The petitioners herein are Government servants, and therefore, there cannot be any apprehension that they could flee from justice. One of the consideration while granting bail to an accused would be to secure his presence during the course of trial. It is trite that refusal of bail to an accused should be neither punitive nor preventive. Undisputedly, the entire

¶83

11 -

¶84

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶85

investigation in the case is completed and multiple additional charge sheets have been also filed. Petitioners are in custody for nearly 17 months. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioners have made out a prima facie case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the following order:

¶86

The petitions are allowed. Petitioners/accused nos.29, 31 & 33 in Spl.C.C.No.590/2023 pending before the XXIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge & Special Judge (PC Act), Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.60/2022 registered by High Grounds Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 36, 37, 119, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 201 read with 34 IPC and Sections 7(A)(C) read with 7A, 8, 13(1)(A), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, shall be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:

¶87

(i) Petitioners each shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) with two sureties for likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

¶88

12 -

¶89

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶90

(ii) Petitioners shall furnish proof of their residential address and shall inform the court, if there any change in the address;

¶91

(iii) Petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶92

(iv) Petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and shall not influence or intimidate any of the Investigating Officers of this case;

¶93

(v) Petitioners shall not travel outside India without prior permission of the jurisdictional court;

¶94

(vi) Petitioners shall cooperate with the further investigation of the case, if any;

¶95

(vii) Petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing, unless exempted for any genuine reason.

¶96

NC: 2023:KHC:36166 CRL.P No. 4848 of 2023 C/W CRL.P.No.5123/2023, CRL.P.No.7037/2023

¶97