Allowed

Mr Imam F Magi @ I F Magi v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC22 Mar 2024CRL.P/905/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Government officials sought anticipatory bail in an FIR alleging loss to the State in the ICT-3 school computerisation project. The court found their roles unexplained, offences non-punishable with death or life imprisonment, evidence documentary, and complaint delayed, and granted anticipatory bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail in event of arrest on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 each with one surety, subject to conditions including surrender, no tampering and periodic attendance before IO.

Mr Imam F Magi @ I F Magi Vs State of Karnataka by — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.905/2024

¶7

C/W

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.823/2024

¶9

IN CRL.P.NO.905/2024:

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

MR. IMAM .F. MAGI @ I.F. MAGI, S/O FAKRUDDIN MAGI, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRINCIPAL, DISTRICT INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING, BANGALORE URBAN, R/AT NO.29, NAGAMMA LAYOUT, SBI ATM BUILDING, KAVAL BYRASANDRA MAIN ROAD, R.T. NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH-560 032.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. HASMATH PASHA, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI. KARIAPPA N.A., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HALASURUGATE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY-560 008 (REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001) (BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

¶18

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CR.NO.358/2023 OF HALASURUGATE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 406, 409, 420, 471, 201, 120B R/W 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, 3^RD ADDL. CMM COURT, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU CITY, WITH A DIRECTION TO RELEASE HIM ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF ARREST BY RESPONDENT POLICE AN INVESTIGATION OFFICER.

¶19

IN CRL.P.NO.823/2024:

¶20

BETWEEN:

¶21

MR. HARI KUMAR JHA SON OF LATE HARIHAR JHA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O: NO.160, 10^TH CROSS, 1^ST MAIN, HIG LAYOUT, BENGALURU NORTH, RMV EXTENSION STAGE II, BENGALURU-560 094.

¶22

…PETITIONER

¶23

(BY SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA .M, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI. THAKUR RISHABHA RAJ, ADVOCATE)

¶24

AND:

¶25

STATE OF KARNATAKA HALASURUGATE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU,

¶26

(REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001)

¶27

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.358/2023 OF HALASURUGATE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 406, 409, 420, 471, 201, 120B R/W 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE PENDING ON THE FILE OF 3^RD ADDL. CMM COURT, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU CITY.

¶28

¶29

THESE PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 14.03.2024, COMING ON FOR ‘PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER’ THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

These petitions are filed seeking anticipatory bail in the event of the arrest of the petitioners in Halasurgate Police Station in Cr.No.358/2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 405, 420, 471, 201, 120B r/w Section 34 of IPC pending on the file of 3^rd Additional CMM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bangalore City.

¶32

The case of the prosecution is that the Central

¶33

Government has decided to implement computerisation in all the schools through the respective State Government

¶34

by providing financial help. In the year 2009, ICT-3 project in 1763 Government Schools and 2633 Aided Schools of Karnataka State were undertaken and Central Government is required to contribute Rs.5 lakhs for each school, while

¶35

State Government to contribute Rs.1.7 lakhs for each school. The State cabinet has decided that in the above

¶36

¶37

4396 Schools computerisation to be implemented through Kenonics, which is a Government undertaken company and decided to release the amount in stages. Then Keonics

¶38

Company called a tenders and the best bidder was M/s. Everonn Education Limited. A contract was entered between the Keonics and M/s. Everonn Company on 27.07.2011 and estimated cost was Rs.22,43,15,279/and bank guarantee of Rs.19.17 crores was given by Everonn. It is further alleged that at the stage of supply of hardware, Everonn Company was expected to advance Rs.82 crores. In the mean while, a PIL was filed making certain allegations of ICT-3 scheme and ultimately, the writ petition was dismissed on 19.08.2013 and till then, no steps could be taken and later on, the new Government has assumed charge. Again, on 27.01.2014 the cabinet has taken a decision to implement the project through Keonics and Education Department has released 25 crores to Keonics to complete the project within 5 years. However, Everonn did not implement the project on the ground that the rate of hardware is raised and revised quotation was submitted. Subsequently, a contract was

¶39

¶40

entered with enhanced amount and work to be implemented through Commissioner of Public Instructions and Director of Department of State Education and Training (for short ‘DSERT’ ) and total value of tender was Rs.412.04 crores. It is alleged that in 2015, Erection of Networking Equipment and supply of Furnitures was completed in all Government Schools. But in Aided School it was partly done.

¶41

As per the case of the prosecution, subsequently, the Additional Chief Secretary has issued a fresh instruction to Keonics with supplementary agreement under stewardship of the Hon’ble Minister for Primary and Secondary Education. However, Ms. Everonn Company did not complete the project blaming the Government in not following the terms and conditions of the agreement and it has resorted to arbitration proceedings. It is further alleged that present petitioner in Crl.P.No.905/2024 was only an Undersecretary and he has no power but to implement the order of Higher Officers and decision of cabinet by issuing the order. The petitioner/accused No.1

¶42

¶43

in Crl.P.No.823/2024 was Managing Director in Keonics during the relevant period. Subsequently, the contract was terminated by the State Government and admittedly, Rs.108 crores was released by DSERT and termination of contract in 2015 was by the Government, which was challenged in a writ petition, which was held to be illegal.

¶44

It is further alleged that in the meanwhile arbitration award was also passed against the Government and now under the guise of Government sustaining loss, the petitioners have been made as a scapegoat. Hence, they have approached the learned Sessions Judge seeking anticipatory bail. The learned Sessions Judge has rejected the bail petition. Hence, the petitioners are before this court.

¶45

Heard the learned counsels appearing for the

¶46

petitioners and perused the records.

¶47

Admittedly, Crl.P.No.823/2024 is filed by

¶48

accused No.1, while Crl.P.905/2024 is filed by accused No.2. At the outset, it is important to note here that

¶49

¶50

accused No.1 is MD in Keonics from 2010 to 2011. When the contract was terminated by the State Government, he was not working as a MD. Further, from amount of Rs.108 crores which was released, it is evident that the networking and supply of furnitures has been completed. Admittedly, the arbitration award was passed against the Government and then an enquiry committee was being formed and on the basis of enquiry report, this complaint was lodged.

¶51

At the outset, what is the role of accused No.2 in this scam is not at all explained. Admittedly, accused No.2, who was petitioner in Crl.P.905/2024 is only working as Under Secretary during the relevant period and he was not a decision taking authority. He was simply supposed to communicate the Cabinet order by issuing Government order after approval of higher authority. He does not have any independent right to take any decision and in what way he is involved in misappropriation or causing loss to the Government is not at all explained.

¶52

¶53

As against accused No.1, the petitioner in

¶54

Crl.P.No.824/24, he was a MD in 2010 to 2012 in Keonics. The contract was terminated by the Government, but not by Keonics. Admittedly, some amount was released to Keoncis and that has already utilized in Networking and furnishing the furnitures. Further, arbitral award is passed against the Government but not against the present petitioner. The termination was also held to be illegal in the writ petition and it is for the state to explain how and for what reason the termination has taken place. Further, though the enquiry officer has implicated the petitioners, on what basis he is fixing the liability, is not at all forthcoming. Admittedly, accused No.1 is already retired and accused No.2 is serving somewhere else. Both are Government Officials and the entire case is based on documentary evidence. Hence, question of tampering the prosecution witnesses or jumping on bail would not arise at all.

¶55

The learned counsel for the petitioners in this context placed reliance on a decision reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 58 ( MARIAM FASIHUDDIN AND

¶56

¶57

ANOTHER V. STATE BY ADUGODI POLICE STATION AND

¶58

ANOTHER ). The ingredients of the offence are required to be established, but they are not forthcoming as against the present petitioners. Further, the offences are not exclusively punishable with death or life imprisonment and are triable by learned Magistrate. Looking to the facts & circumstances, I do not find any impediment for admitting the petitioners on bail, as there is in-ordinate delay in lodging the complaint also. The other apprehensions raised by the learned HCGP can be meted out by imposing certain conditions. Hence, both the petitions need to be allowed and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶59

ORDER

¶60

(I) Both the petitions are allowed .

¶61

(II) The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.358/2023 of Halasurgate Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 405, 420, 471, 201, 120B r/w Section 34 of IPC pending on the file of 3^rd Additional CMM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bangalore City, on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the

¶62

10 -

¶63

Investigating Officer or the concerned trial Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶64

(i) Petitioners shall surrender themselves before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and in the event of surrender, Investigating Officer/SHO shall release them on bail as directed.

¶65

(ii) They shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses.

¶66

(iii) They shall not indulge in any similar offences.

¶67

(iv) They shall make themselves available to the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for during course of investigation.

¶68

(v) They shall mark their attendance before the Investigating Officer/SHO between 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m on every second and fourth Saturday of the month till the final report is submitted.

¶69

Sd/JUDGE

¶70

Mr Imam F Magi @ I F Magi v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Imam F Magi @ I F Magi v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesha Vs State of Karnataka

Arjunkumar @ Arjun Vs State by Karnataka by

Nagamallappa @ Nagamalu Vs State by Karnataka by

Sri. Vyshnav .D Vs the State of Karnataka

Mallappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Harish @ Dinesh S.S. Vs State of Karnataka