@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
A.V. Chandrashekara, J.@mdashThis petition is filed by the petitioners - accused Nos. 6, 7 and 8 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in respect of Cr. No. 7/14 registered by Mysore Lokayuktha Police, Mysore under Sections 13(1)(c)(d)(ii) & (iii) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, r/w. Section 420 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.
3. Learned High Court Government Pleader has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that it is too pre-mature to dis-believe the materials collected by the Lokayuktha police and detailed first information lodged by the concerned Authority. Hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary.
4. Perused the records.
5. Case has been registered against these petitioners and seven others for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c)(d)(ii) & (iii) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 r/w. Section 420 of IPC. The 10th accused - Raghupathi Bhat is stated to have carried out gold leafing work of Mysore Palace during the year 2007-2008 and 2012-2013. The said work is alleged to be of sub-standard. Allegation is that a sum of Rs. 4,10,38,141/- has been misappropriated on breach of trust. On the basis of the source report submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Lokayuktha Mysore, case has been registered.
6. These petitioners and other accused had approached the learned III Additional Sessions and Special Judge at Mysore seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in Crl. Misc. Nos. 1011, 1002, 1038, 1018, 1003 & 1163/2014. All the petitions filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. have been dismissed after contest vide considered order dated 17-07-2014.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner herein has vehemently argued that no allegation of misuse of amount is made against these petitioners and that they were only entrusted with the work. It is further argued that these petitioners had been furnished with questionnaires by the respondent - police and those questionnaires have been duly answered and handed over to the respondent -police. Hence, it is argued that substantial investigation is already over and hence, prays that they be released on bail. He has also argued that petitioners have undertaken to abide by any conditions to be imposed on them.
8. After perusing the records more particularly the order dated 17-07-2014 passed by the learned III Additional Sessions and Special Judge, Mysore discloses that accused Nos. 2 and 10 had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail in Crl. P. Nos. 3492/2014 and 3493/2014 respectively. Both petitions were dismissed after contest on 17-06-2014. The relevant observation made by this Court is referred to in the order dated 17-07-2014 passed by the Court at Mysore. A detailed observation has been made by this Court with regard to the gravity of the offences and role of the several persons involved in the alleged offences.
9. The allegation as against all these accused is that they have misused the public money to the tune of Rs. 4.5 crores. Admittedly, these petitioners are responsible to get the work completed and they were the inspecting authorities and authorities to release the amount. Taking into consideration the nature of the offences, the gravity of the offences and circumstances under which the public money is stated to have been misused this is not a fit case where discretion could be exercised under Section 438 of Cr.P.C at this stage. Apart from this, as argued by the learned counsel for the respondent, these petitioners are required for custodial interrogation which is an important aspect in a case like this. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.
10. Notwithstanding the dismissal of the bail petition, the petitioners are entitled to file regular bail application before this Court or before the Sessions Court, as the case may be. It is made clear that any observations made in this order would not prejudice the learned Sessions Judge/Special dealing with the application which may be filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
