Sri Chikkabettaiah vs The Police Inspector on 5 October, 2010

I-',Url;an D--ivis?iOn,"I~ 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE,'
DATED THIS THE ST" DAY OF OCTOBER  
BEFORE    it 
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE  
CRIMINAL PETITION NO,a4.7:ét'7_/C201o_--»_:.A'A' - = C' 
BETWEEN: V   C it 

Sri. Chikkabettaiah,

S/o Boraiah,

Aged about 59 years, .
Assistant Commissioner,  _  '
Gas Authority of I_ndi«a l'_'_td.,$,
Thimmaiah Road,  __ .    
Bangalore--S6O€OO1.';'--.V"""--,._ I    Petitioner

(By Sri. V3,».  
AND: V V V

The Police .Inspe"ctor,w .. 
Ka rnataka Lo!-<ayu i<t'i°-..ag Police,

    __  Respondent

 (By".S-ri"..'--.B.A';  Special Public Prosecutor)

Cvrimmal Petition is filed under Section---482 of Code of

 Procedure praying to quash the FIR and further
 'iniiiestigaition in Crime No.44/10 dated 21.9.2010 of Lokayuktha

 I  Bangalore Urban, registered for the offence punishable
 "u.ndVe'r Section 7, 13(1)(c)(d) read with 13(2) of the prevention

':<3Lf



of corruption Act, 1988 and section 465, 468, 471, £E§,.2'{'J,.and
120(6) of Indian Penal Code. "    

This Criminal Petition coming on for admiss_io'ii...thi»As:'d.,aylithe,C 

Court made the following:

0 R  C

This Criminal Petition is filed""u.nder se£:tioh4n--482Toi Code of

Criminal Procedure prayi,ig.,,,_tot--V,.tlie Fllivlvlif and further
investigation in Crime  of Karnataka
Lokayu kta Police, ;Ba'h£g,,a|ore_ registered for the
offences punisf§abi;e";,:_i}n':d~eir::'§e'ctio.nisV'?,"'i3(1)(c)(d) read with
13(2) of  Act, 1988 and Sections

465, 468, 49/1,,' 42o  the Indian Penal Code.

2.,.'.;:'Witi7 the "r::on__s__er:t of the learned counsel for the

o~e_titioiie_r as wel,l:'a.s__ the learned counsel for the respondent, this

 matterAVi'.isi'heard._ onhlmerits. The materials placed before this

 Court are su'ffic'i'e.nt to dispose of the matter at this stage.

--   The primary facts of the case of the prosecution are as



One Sri i,uty

Commissioner, the award amount has been r_€t€_A3sed:.A_t,}* in tone' 

case, even after the death of the cijaima:nt,g, the"Aco_tripe.nsa,t_io'n

amount has been disbursed. "these arethe a,iieigations"3rn'ade'r1

against the petitioner and other 

4. Learned counsei for as under:

That the  ..Qff.i'cejr hasmexercised the judicial
power under._Sect.io'ii::*;1§1,(3).:'cf::'th'e Act and Section--11 of
the Land A:cqui.s'itioVn'V'Att,"A _;!'h:£_.3V"'i)O\riier exercised by the petitioner

is in the natu"re_4 or power. The petitioner served

only for«.{a period V.'Of~~ ,fo_u_r,.months as Special Land Acquisition

 to 11.11.2009. At the most, the

aileoa-tiions  iiyjthe compiaint attract the irregularity, but not

 the otfe'ncescc'tin'd"er Sections 7, 13(1)(c)(d) read with 13(2) of the

.T,:VVF"'i'ue'v!.eA'i1'ti--Q.&n of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 465, 468, 471,

 4.2;o"an'd't12o(a) of the Indian Penal code. The payment of the

 '  L-oirnpensation has also been approved by the higher authorities.

,e/



5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that. the

matter is still at the preliminary stage of investigat«éon_ja_n'dj' _,g§'ti.lii

the Police have to record the statements_...a'vi41_'c!.VV'seinel't'taleVp*.._

documents.

6. Learned counsel for the're'spondent_hasllfiiedfistatémentrV

of objections wherein he has stateAd._.aVs"iiinder:

6.1 That one Rukumanflg'i'iien.,"a:» the Lokayukta
Police alleging  by Nagaraj, the
Special Land    and Nagabushan,
Managar,  disbursement of compensation.
On the basisol' his  No.24/2010 was registered

for the offenceslapiicnishabiié. under sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with

,f§'e'ct.i.oAn otthe ifiréiiention of Corruption Act. A trap was

aIso._.Ia'ic|. agajinst' t'he_accused persons therein.

6.2.. Tha't-during the course of investigation in Crime

several files relating to award of compensation by

  secured and it was then noticed by the Investigating

  that fraud has been played by the officials of KIADB in

£51'



the matter of disbursement of compensation. The Investigating

Officer then immediately reported the matter to his supeVri_oi'i5viili~o

in turn requested the Chief Executive Officer  

conduct an enquiry. The Chief Execut;.iJvef_:OffiVce_r, 

detailed enquiry submitted a report  Sup'e.i'in'tehdent'lofg

Police wherein large scale fraud""r4.iVnvo|ving",se've-ra|",crores of

rupees came to light.  on'th_'e-isaigd"'.reportHforvvarded by
the Chief Executive Officer of-.'lA<V_I."A\l'Vi.*Ji35'tQ..,,_ti;.§:.Superintendent of

Police, Lokayukta,   be registered.

6.3   and during his
tenure as  Officer has dishonestly and
fraudulently  sums of public money to the
tune of "nearly 3 """  In the circumstances, the learned

counsei«.f'oi'  -respondent prayed for dismissal of this criminal

   

 }'.«I4_ have carefully examined the averments made in the

If*,_'compl'ain't°with due care and caution. The averments made in

'complaint discloses several allegations made against the

<2/'



petitioner. The poiice papers reveais that the petitioner is

aiieged to have misappropriated huge sum of pub|ic".m'o.rievvV.4to

the extent of nearly three crores and this was 'w'.h_"i_iei'~.

conducting investigation in Crime I\£o.24y'i'.0é10-".4. 'avVerrnerivtsV'

made in the compiaint reveals that i"compensatio'n-. ,Vamcs:Liin.t'V"is

disbursed in the names though th.e'i'i<.._names__ isnovt   the'?

notification, and in some." cases" :c_om'pensation. amount is
disbursed on fictitious namestwo awards has
been passed on single   is still under the
investigation. "has.__:to_ power under section-
482 of Code rarest of rare cases,
that too witvhvgireat  In my view, this is not the

rarest of rare cas"e._w|1er'e t'his'"Court can exercise its power under

I-éection943532»-."*.of'i'..CodeéV""oFAvCriminai Procedure to quash the

proceedin'gs.:"»..,:fi"'iiVi'sr~Criminal Petition is devoid of merits and the

. I

ii'i"~';=ame iisiiabie ~to'jbe dismissed. '5 

 AA8. At. tlnis stage, iearned counsel for the petitioner submits

'"=«t'i*.at be permitted to fiie an appiication for discharge in

t:iie.,Court below. In case, if the petitioner fiies an application

"S

i7<:1./T



for discharge in the Court below, the same shall be disposed of
in accordance with law.
9. In the result, I pass the following:

ORDER

1. This Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Misc.Crl.4046/2010 for stay stands;’disi%§iissed}=_ ll

2. In case if the petitioner filesla:n~.,app|Ai’cationV lio’rA”§di’s-c.ha:rge in

the Court below, the saifne shall.__ljAe..d’i’s,oose’d”‘of_in,accordance
with law. The observati’orl”s–.n1acie} not influence
the trial Court whi’ie__decid’i’n’g::the’ ior discharge.

sa/»
woes