High Court of Karnataka
N. ANANDA, J.
Ramakant Y Hullar
Versus
State of Karnataka rep. by its Special Public Prosecutor
Criminal Petition No. 4853 of 2013
Decided On : 23-09-2013
Bail - Offences under IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act - 120B, 379, 420, 427, 447, 468, 471, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C.Act - The court examined the nature of accusations, prima facie material, severity of punishment, character of accused, reasonable possibility of securing petitioner at the time of trial, reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with, larger interest of public/State, prospects of speedy trial, and the stage at which bail is sought. The court found a prima facie case against the petitioner for an offence punishable under section 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of P.C.Act. Considering the punishment provided for the alleged offences, the petitioner's antecedents, and the remote chances of fleeing from justice or tampering with witnesses, the court granted bail to the petitioner with specific conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, accused No.7, was alleged to have conspired with others to facilitate illegal iron ore mining by instructing subordinates not to take action on complaints by NMDC and interpolating a complaint against DMSPL. The court examined the evidence to determine the existence of a prima facie case for bail.
Finding of the Court:
The court found a prima facie case against the petitioner for an offence punishable under section 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of P.C.Act. The court also considered the petitioner's retirement, lack of criminal antecedents, remote chances of fleeing from justice, and the possibility of tampering with witnesses, and granted bail with specific conditions.
Issues: The court examined the nature of accusations, prima facie material, severity of punishment, character of accused, reasonable possibility of securing petitioner at the time of trial, reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with, larger interest of public/State, prospects of speedy trial, and the stage at which bail is sought.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the severity of punishment, the petitioner's antecedents, and the remote chances of fleeing from justice or tampering with witnesses, and granted bail to the petitioner with specific conditions.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to specific conditions.
1. The petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.7 in the final report submitted in R.C.19(A)/2011 for offences punishable under sections 120B r/w 379, 420, 427 & 447 IPC and also for an offence punishable under section 13 (2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, 'the P.C.Act'). He has been in judicial custody from 05.06.2013. He has sought for bail.
2. The aforestated final report is the outcome of investigation conducted in pursuance of the orders of Supreme Court dated 23.09.2011 in Special Leave (Civil) 7366-7367 & connected matters reading as hereunder:-"(iii) Vide the said report of CEC, it is further pointed out to this Court that massive illegal mining by a third party was being done in mining lease No.1111 of M/s.NMDC. That, despite various complaints to the numerous authorities in the State of Karnataka by M/s.NMDC no steps were taken to prevent that third party from resorting to massive illegal mining in mining lease No.1111 of M/s.NMDC till this court banned mining. These complaints were made against the third party, namely, M/s.Deccan Mining Syndicate ("DMS" for short) for encroaching into M/s.NMDC's mining lease area. Even the complaint lodged by M/s.NMDC against M/s.DMS to the Police Circle Inspector, Sandur on 10.07.2009 was interpolated (See Annexure R-1 to the Report being letter dated 15.09.2011 by M/s.NMDC Limited to CEC). We also want CBI to investigate the above illegalities including encroachment by M/s.Deccan Mining Syndicate in the area leased out to M/s.NMDC."
3. Based on the above order, CBI, ACB, Bangalore registered FIR in RC.19(A)/2011 for offences punishable under sections 120-B, 379, 411, 420, 427, 447, 468 & 471 IPC, for offences punishable under sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C.Act, for an offence punishable under section 26 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and also for offences punishable under sections 21 r/w 4(1), 4(1)(A) & 23 of the Mines & Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
4. In brief, the allegations made against petitioner (accused No.7) in chargesheet and annexed documents are as follows:-
"That Shri Ramakant Y Hullur (A-7) was serving as the Circle Inspector of Sandur had not taken any action on the complaints preferred by M/s.NMDC to stop the illegal iron ore extracted by M/s.DMSPL (A-2) from the area of M/s.NMDC and also instructed his subordinates not to take any action and thereby facilitated the illegal extraction of iron ore by acting in pursuance of the conspiracy with the other accused persons."
5. It is alleged that petitioner (accused No.7) was the Police Inspector of Sandur Police Station. On 31.08.2009, one Sri Raghavendra and one Sri B.Vidyasagar of National Mineral Development Corporation (for short, 'NMDC') had lodged a complaint with Sandur Police Station, alleging that DMSPL had committed illegal acts. Further it is alleged that petitioner (accused No.7) was Police Inspector of Sandur Police Station during period from 10.09.2008 to 25.03.2009 and from 12.06.2009 to 26.03.2011. During aforestated period, petitioner had conspired with other accused and in pursuance of the conspiracy, he had instructed his subordinate Sub-Inspector not to take any action on the complaints preferred by M/s.NMDC and he had deliberately ignored the complaints preferred by NMDC and thereby facilitated illegal iron ore mining from the mining area of M/s.NMDC by M/s.DMSPL. It is also alleged that petitioner was responsible for interpolation of first information dated 10.07.2009 lodged by NMDC against DMSPL. In the first information and investigation records it is stated that on 10.07.2009, the Assistant Manager of NMDC requested Sandur Police to lodge first information report against DMSPL for carrying out illegal mining in those areas of NMDC. However, in letter actually delivered to the Police Station, the words "lodge a FIR" has been scored out by the Assistant Manager (Mech.) and replaced with the words "take an action." Such interpolati
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.